企业代理背后的 Websockets [英] Websockets behind enterprises proxies

问题描述

根据这些 文章，Websocket成功率只有63%(如果你有websocket- 浏览器就绪).

According to these articles, Websocket success rate is only 63 % (if you have a websocket-ready browser).

还有这篇 InfoQ 文章(http://www.infoq.com/articles/Web-Sockets-Proxy-Servers) 表示您有更好的机会使用 Secured Websockets (wss://) 进行连接.

And this InfoQ article (http://www.infoq.com/articles/Web-Sockets-Proxy-Servers) says that you have better chance to connect by using Secured Websockets (wss://).

是否有人对他们将 Websockets 用于企业级应用程序、企业代理和防火墙背后的使用有任何反馈?

Does anyone have any feedback on their use of the Websockets for an enterprise ready application, behind enterprise proxies and firewall ?

如果我的问题偏离主题，我很抱歉.

I'm sorry if my question is off-topic.

问候，妮可

推荐答案

那封电子邮件和文章快两年了.

That email and article are approaching two years old.

那些问题与服务器或代理有关.wss://更成功的原因是 SSL 流量对中介更不透明，因此更有可能在没有干扰的情况下传递.

Those problems were either server or proxy related. The reason that wss:// is more successful is because SSL traffic is more opaque to intermediaries and so it is more likely that it will just be passed along without interference.

随着 WebSocket 变得越来越普遍，随着代理、防火墙、负载平衡器和网络服务器中的问题得到解决，这些问题将开始消失.

As WebSockets becomes more common, those issues will begin to dissipate as the issues are fixed in proxies, firewalls, load-balancers, and web servers.

此外，关于浏览器中的 WebSockets 支持，如果您包含基于 Flash 的 web-socket-js 作为 Web 应用程序中的 polyfill/fallback，您将获得几乎通用的浏览器支持.

Also, regarding WebSockets support in browsers, if you include the Flash based web-socket-js as a polyfill/fallback in your web application then you get nearly universal browser support.

这篇关于企业代理背后的 Websockets的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！