I have the Sonos Acme developer test service setup and running but my Sonos Player doesn't seem to be able to connect. I'm wondering if a TLS SSL certificate is required no matter what even in a sandboxed environment.
I'm running the java service on a remote AWS instance behind a domain. The service is setup with the default installation details. It does not log any sort of connection attempt once I add the service to the Sonos player via customSD.
Accessing the Sonos Player via customSD and adding the Acme service does respond with Success! But again it doesn't show up in the service list. Manually pulling the WSDL does work correctly via the http request.
Also to note that Sonos seems to be in the middle of creating it's new developer portal and since last Monday ( June 24th ) the new portal no longer references the Acme test service. I'm wondering if this is due to it no longer being valid and it's documentation out of date (est. 2017-2018).
I expect the service to show up in the Sonos Controller when adding a new service but it doesn't appear and the log doesn't show any attempts to connect.
An SSL endpoint is required for production, but you can use a non-SSL endpoint for testing. See the comments in this answer for details: With a Sonos player, adding local service to customSD does not show up Music Services
Related
I am looking for guide who have experience with Interactive Brokers Client Portal API. The Interactive Brokers CLient Portal API provides a gateway service.
I have tested this IB Gateway in my local and locally it is working fine.
The gateway is running on https://localhost:5000
I want to put this service on the windows server and want to access by server ip.
for example: https://52.xx.xx.12:5000 like this
I also tried solution from this reference Running interactive brokers client portal API in cloud server but not got success
Thanks
You need to set your server IP address in IB gateway setting as a trusted IP, and you should open 5000 port in firewall as well.
I have the starting shell of a SMAPI service programmed in Node.js. The service is running off of a local IP address.
When I goto the customSD page for my Sonos Play:1 and add the service details to it and it returns 'Success!' upon clicking submit.
When I open the Sonos Controllers on both my desktop and mobile, the service does not show up in the list of music services you can add.
I have logging on the server turned on to max and there are no connection attempts ( either SSL or HTTP ) at all.
From what I've read, a running service is not needed for it to show up in the list. Once it's added via customSD it should show up in the Music Service settings.
TO NOTE: A self signed cert is being used for https for connection testing only. I have certificate request logging turned on and there is NO connection attempt from the Sonos Play:1 to the local server at all. From everything I've read this shouldn't matter as it should show up in the Music Service list until you try to add it and then it will connect to the service.
The only thing I can think of is if this service needs to be registered with Sonos before it can be added via customSD, however at this time nothing I've read says that.
The other thing is if this service needs to be running off a domain name for some reason. However in the documentation it lists IP address so it would be bad documentation then.
I expect the service added via customSD should show up in the list. It does not appear when clicking on add.
Understood the issue and YvesGrantSonos has updated the documentation.
If you're developing locally a non-https IP address should be used for both the secure and non-secure API URI's.
You should be able enter a local IP address for the SMAPI service. For testing, this should be on the same local network as the Sonos player. Be sure to include the port number that the service is running on (i.e. http://192.168.1.2:8080/musicservice). You can use the same IP and port for secure and insecure connections.
I want to be able to expose my local machine address to the internet to be able to work with:
Google OAuth2 flow;
Receiving Push-Notifications for changes in my calendars/events;
So that, I need some tool that will expose my local machine URLs to the Internet so Google will be able to use this web hooks.
I found that ngrok with basic(5$) subscription works for me. Free versions doesn't work since I need SSL as it's required by google:
This is your Webhook callback URL, and it must use HTTPS. Note that
the Google Calendar API will be able to send notifications to this
HTTPS address only if there is a valid SSL certificate installed on
your web server. Invalid certificates include: • Self-signed
certificates. • Certificates signed by an untrusted source.
• Certificates that have been revoked. • Certificates that have a
subject that doesn't match the target hostname.
The question is whether there is something else I haven't taken into account that will force me to buy more expensive type of subscription? Maybe some specific requirenments from Google that basic subscription can't work with.
Basic $5 subscription works perfectly. It fits all Google's requirements + it provides static URLs that make it possible to receive PUSH notifications even when you restart your ngrok or computer.
I have WCF Service hosted in IIS using https and self sign certificate created from IIS for my local pc
If i enter in my desktop browser the following link:
https://MyHostName:MyPort/MyService.svc WORKS and is secured.
The same link in different pc in my local LAN gives me warning that this site is not secure and asks me to click and verify that i want to proceed and when i do it i can see the service .. ( which i assume has something to do with my certificate)
MAIN PROBLEM
The same link again FAIL using android google chrome with out give me a warning . Just fail with the error "This site can't be reached.... ERR_NAME_NOT_RESOLVED"
Please help.
I am trying to connect to the service from my xamarin Forms android application (https) but before that i try to test the wcf service from my android browser to verify that the service is available before trying to connect
if this is due to certification how can i configure it correctly to be secure? should i buy one?
i was hoping to test my service before proceeding buying one.
anyone has any ideas?
using valid certificate fixed the issue.
We have front and back end cloud service that communicate via WCF services which are secured using certificate credentials. The problem we are having is that the request fails with the following error:
verb="POST"
authenticationType="NOT_AVAILABLE" activityId="{00000000-0000-0000-0400-0080000000F7}"
failureReason="STATUS_CODE"
statusCode="403.16"
triggerStatusCode="403.16"
(From IIS failed request tracing)
I believe the issue is as described here:
https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/help/252657/iis-5.0-http-403.16-forbidden-client-certificate-untrusted-or-invalid
(That the server does not trust third party CAs by default. )
If I do as described in the link the issue is resolved but the cloud service isn't part of a domain and I don't know how to apply this setting as part of the deployment or programmatically as part of the start-up.
What I also find strange is that this issue doesn't seem common even though I presume securing WCF communications on Azure cloud services using certificates isn't unusual, so I wonder if the issue is a symptom of something else I am doing wrongly.