Currently we are using a home-grown comet/websocket library for the push connections. This was very sensible in 2009 when no other libraries were around.
Currently there are libraries managing push connections. I think that it is good to evaluate which library is best and replace our own solution.
cc: @kaos @arjan @mmzeeman
Recent versions of socket.io seem indeed like a feature framework bloat thing, if you read yuri's comments in the readme of the erlang implementation, https://github.com/yrashk/socket.io-erlang
That makes http://sockjs.org much more attractive.
There is also an Erlang server: https://github.com/sockjs/sockjs-erlang
Some issues i've encountered.
So it is nice to also have fallbacks methods ready. For channel we start with trying a websocket on port 443. That usually works because traffic on that port is not checked by mobile providers and corporate firewalls.
Another library we can consider to use is engine.io, which is actually the transport layer of socket.io.
After having looked at the protocol definitions of sock.js and engine.io I must say I like engine.io better.
Nice summary, for using engine.io, then!
Indeed. I agree with the comments about sock.js - seems more like a framework for node applications than a transport library.
I concur :)
I need a more stable session/page-session, so will try to get this in the next release.
so is this still relevant?