-
JRHaigh
Hi. What configuration options might affect the interoperability of an Ejabberd service with a Prosody service? Direct chat works fine, but Prosody users can't access a private MUC on the Ejabberd service, don't see the invites sent from an Ejabberd user. When manually sent the 'xmpp:...?join' URI for the private chat, the Prosody users see only an unlabelled empty channel with greyed-out send button, and attempting to send a message results in " Remote server not found [LEAVE] " The Ejabberd users in the chat can see the invited Prosody users as "(Offline)", even though they can directly message those users and see them as Online (green send button) in the direct chats. All the Ejabberd users currently use Conversations on Android; the 2 Prosody users tested so-far have used Blabber.im and Conversations (the latter being myself testing from my spare account on the Prosody service). The Ejabberd service run by my friend at Vikings.net is tiny compared to the Prosody service Disroot.org, and so I guess that the misconfiguration is on the Ejabberd side. *What Ejabberd configuration options should I ask my friend at Vikings.net to check? What Prosody configuration options should I ask Disroot admins to check?*
-
Martin
JRHaigh: Non standrad s2s port and no SRC records maybe?✎ -
Martin
JRHaigh: Non standard xmpp-server port and no srv records for the muc component maybe? ✏
-
Martin
Looks like vikings.net should do srv records: > xmpp-dns -sft vikings.net > No server SRV records found. > Trying fallback ports. > > xmpp-server vikings.net 5269 > Priority: 0 Weight: 0 > IP: 2a01:4f8:c2c:e5a4::1 > Connection: [Not OK] > dial tcp6 [2a01:4f8:c2c:e5a4::1]:5269: connect: connection refused > IP: 168.119.169.112 > Connection: [Not OK] > dial tcp4 168.119.169.112:5269: connect: connection refused > > xmpps-server vikings.net 5270 > Priority: 0 Weight: 0 > IP: 2a01:4f8:c2c:e5a4::1 > Connection: [Not OK] > dial tcp6 [2a01:4f8:c2c:e5a4::1]:5270: connect: connection refused > IP: 168.119.169.112 > Connection: [Not OK] > dial tcp4 168.119.169.112:5270: connect: connection refused
-
JRHaigh
> JRHaigh: Non standard xmpp-server port and no srv records for the muc component maybe? Why would that affect MUCs but not direct chats?
-
JRHaigh
> Looks like vikings.net should do srv records: Okay, the actual Jabber service is on Jabber.Vikings.net, though.
-
Martin
Ok, this looks better: > xmpp-dns -st jabber.vikings.net > xmpps-server jabber.vikings.net. 5270 > Priority: 4 Weight: 0 > IP: 185.199.141.40 > Connection: [Not OK] > dial tcp4 185.199.141.40:5270: connect: connection refused > > xmpp-server jabber.vikings.net. 5269 > Priority: 5 Weight: 0 > IP: 185.199.141.40 > Connection: [OK] > StartTLS: [OK] > Certificate: [OK]
-
Martin
But xmpps-server seems to be broken.
-
Martin
Do you know what their MUC component looks like?
-
JRHaigh
No, sorry.
-
Martin
What is behind the @ if you create a MUC there?
-
JRHaigh
I didn't realise that MUC was done as a separate component... > What is behind the @ if you create a MUC there? ...Oh wait, yes, I know what you mean now, it's 'conference.'! :-)
-
JRHaigh
I.e. '...@conference.Jabber.Vikings.net'.
-
Martin
> No IP addresses found for conference.jabber.vikings.net
-
JRHaigh
Okay, so this starts to make sense, now!
-
Martin
They need DNS records for conference.jabber.vikings.net
-
Martin
Otherwise people on other servers will have a hard time to connect there. :)
-
JRHaigh
Someone on another channel suggested that there's possibly a DNS issue and I didn't understand how such an issue could affect MUCs while direct chats still work... But now I see it! MUC is a component and it is at a subdomain to the subdomain. :-) Thanks!
-
JRHaigh
Yep, I'll pass this on to him and see whether he can fix it. :-)
-
Martin
Good luck. :)
-
mjk
It's always DNS xD But I should have pointed out that rooms are usually on a different domain from users
-
JRHaigh
X-D
-
JRHaigh
Okay, I've messaged him about the missing DNS records for conference.Jabber.Vikings.net. :-)
-
JRHaigh
But he did say this morning that he'd rather not investigate till he's back from break tomorrow, so I probably won't see it working till then.
-
JRHaigh
Anyway, thanks for your help Martin; and thanks mjk for your help earlier and introducing me to this XMPP Service Operators channel. :-D I think if I stay in here, I might be more inclined to start my own server someday as well. :-)
-
Martin
yw
-
JRHaigh
I sent him the join URI seeing as he actually is an XMPP server operator, he may like to know about this channel as well. :-)
-
rozzin
JRHaigh: your friend may also need to do something to get a TLS certificate for the "conference" subdomain.
-
JRHaigh
rozzin: Thanks. :-)
-
JRHaigh
Okay cool, he's just acknowledged my messages and said that he thinks he never sorted this bit out but will do tomorrow. :-)
-
rozzin
There are a bunch of different subdomains for different aspects of ejabberd service; it can be quite a pain to get them all sorted out initially, but the once you do it can be pretty maintenance-free.
-
moparisthebest
log4j2 CVE #4 https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-44832 it's pretty lame compared to the previous ones though
-
Maranda
Huhu
-
Maranda
That's quite an endless can of worms by the looks
-
Maranda
And now that they picked on it even more
-
Maranda
(as usual)
-
Licaon_Kter
Shake the can more so all the spiders get out...