my mirth connect uses 10 people simultaneously
EX . one reprocoss hl7 message and another user Remove Message.
So i want to which user will which process with time and date and ip address
plz suggestion it important
The commercial version of Mirth Connect supports advanced user management and advanced alerting, which sounds like what you need.
From the Mirth Site:
Advanced Alerting
Advanced Alerting provides metric, exception, and state-based monitoring of channels and connectors. Additional features include automatic escalation and de-escalation, scheduling, and notification throttling. Using advanced alerts, dynamically send different alert messages to different user groups based on the current escalation level, time, and day. The new alert dashboard provides a view of all alert statistics and logs.
User Authorization
User Authorization provides role-based access control to all aspects of the Mirth Connect Administrator. Create new roles with specific permissions to areas such as channel management or message browsing. Assign any number of roles to users. Use this to manage access to sensitive channel and messaging data across your enterprise.
Related
How can I prevent telegram from sending certain zabbix trigger?
I wan prevent sending certain trigger (problem) to telegram.
How I can perform this in zabbix?
You should manage actions and their conditions
The most basic action will send a message via all media to a specific user: you can modify this behavior with conditions, for instance to send to a specific user via email for lesser alert, then via telegram for High or Critical triggers.
You can also use tags, host, host groups etc: see the full conditions list
Also consider that a specific user will receive only the alerts for hosts which he has read permission: you can filter on this as well.
We have an enterprise installation of QuickBlox (which implements XMPP), and would like to create mirrored accounts for all of our users on our QuickBlox server install. We also want to sync the networks our system's users have created using relationships (eg, "client and provider") that have been built on our system.
In a nutshell, we want to export whitelists that limit chat "opponents" to only those users with whom each of our users already have relationships. If User1 has an existing relationship in our system with User2 and User3 but not User4 through User40, we want to be able to use the QuickBlox API to enforce that within chat by creating a whitelist through the QuickBlox API.
EDIT: We can't use an "honor system" whitelist. That is, the enforcement must be server-side using a method the client cannot circumvent. There must be a hard, unavoidable block between users for privacy concerns.
Use case:
A QuickBlox (or XMPP) server has User1 through User40, inclusive.
User1's whitelist is comprised of [User2, User3] only.
If User1 attempts to contact User15, we want QuickBlox/XMPP to note that User15 is not on User1's whitelist and block that communication as if User1 had bidirectionally blocked that user.
Privacy lists, aka blacklists
I have found places in QB's docs that refer to the XMPP specification docs, and have found the concept of privacy lists, which seem to operate as blacklists:
https://quickblox.com/developers/Web_XMPP_Chat_Sample#Privacy_lists
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0016.html#protocol-syntax
These only provide two styles of blacklist privacy:
You can choose a type of blocked logic (Privacy List). There are 2
types:
Block in one way. You are blocked, but you can write to
blocked user.
Block in two ways. You are blocked and you also can't
write to blocked user.
Server Whitelist (dialog-level, not user)
I've also found documentation on whitelists for servers, which appear to operate at a dialog/jid, not user, level:
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0133.html#edit-whitelist
An entity added to a whitelist MAY be a JID of any form as specified in RFC 6120... a whitelist may prevent inbound communications, outbound communications, or both...
Rosters -- "presence" detail only?
There are also rosters, which are close to whitelists, but they do not seem in my testing to restrict communication between any two users that might not be on each other's roster.
https://quickblox.com/developers/Web_XMPP_Chat_Sample#Get_the_roster
That is to say, I haven't set up a roster in my testing application, and users are able to create group and 1-on-1 chat dialogs in spite of not having explicitly accepted any roster requests. In the Android docs, I found the following on rosters: "[A roster] is the collection of users a person receives presence updates for." That's not blocking in any way outside of presence alerts, I don't believe.
Question
Is there a suggested way to create a pessimistic whitelist for each user, which only contain those users with whom communication is allowed? Or are we forced to create and maintain "inverse blacklists", where we automate the creation of privacy lists for every new user blocking every other user and then use the API to remove those with which each user should be able to communicate?
If we do have to use "inverse blacklists", is there a way to have a default blacklist apply to every new user that initially blocks communication with every other user already in our QuickBlox system?
(Again, we can't use "honor system" lists. If the client must request a whitelist to be active before it can be used, can freely discover and then change active whitelists, or if the client can decline to use a list, that's not secure enough.)
XMPP Clients
XMPP clients will need a way to ask another clients if they support receiving pushes via a relay. Since pushes can be sent from anywhere, clients will also be able to send pushes directly to other clients through the relay as long as they have their friend’s whitelist token. They will also need to respond to XMPP server inquiries for whitelist tokens to allow pushes to be sent by the server if a message is sent by a client not supporting direct push.
XMPP Servers
XMPP servers can ask their connected clients if they support push relays and, if so, forward messages they receive to the push relay server when the client is offline. This will require the XMPP server to obtain a whitelist token from the user as well.
Help:see this link
If we are talking about XMPP protocol - there is an ability to block any communications from/to (see example 48)
So, by default, you can set it for each user for example.
Then, if we need to allow to communicate with someone specific,
then you can add this user to your privacy list with action=allow and order greater than 'full block'. Here is actually a good example of whitelist implementation via Privacy Lists, see example 8:
and (3) 'special', which allows communications only with three
specific entities.
When building a social application it's common to follow other users or topics as an indication of interest in updates by the user or topic. For example, following other users on Twitter, Friending other people on Facebook or liking a product or brand on Facebook.
Pusher has the concept of channels that you subscribe to. Channels are a human readable string that provide a logical identifier to information (e.g. "some-channel-name") and therefore seems to naturally suggest that in a social application any updates on a user or topic should be sent on a channel specific to that item (e.g. "userX-status-updates" or "myBrand-status-updates").
However, this raises concerns about how efficient it is to subscribe to multiple channels if a user is following a high number of other users or topic.
Therefore, what are the appropriate strategies for structuring channels in an social status update style application that uses Pusher?
The first thing to clarify is that you need a mapping of who you are following so for the purposes of this answer I'm going to assume that it's stored in a DB on the server. It also assumed that status updates are triggered as follows:
Client (userX posts status update) -> Your Server (sanitize & validate)
Your Server -> Pusher
Pusher -> Clients (users interested in updates from UserX)
There are two possible solutions to the channel information architecture problem:
Channel Per User Status: A user subscribes to a userX-status-updates channel for all the users that they follow and users trigger update events on their own status update channel.
Users I'm Following Channel: When a user posts a status update you look up who is following that user and publish the update on a users-you-follow-updates channel.
Strategy 1. is the most optimal solution as it keeps interactions with your own infrastructure an Pusher to a minimum.
Here's the detail on these two strategies:
1. Channel Per User Status
The assumption here is that subscribing to channels is costly but that not entirely correct. Channels are simply a way of routing events. However, if you are using authenticated channels (private & presence) you need to authenticate the subscription via your own server. If you use the Pusher WebSocket libraries "out of the box" each subscription will result in a request to your server. So, a user is following 1,000 users that's 1,000 requests to your server.
But, for the pusher-js library there is a multi-auth plugin that can batch the authentication requests into a single call.
There is also a BatchAuthorizer for the Pusher WebSocket Java library, but it's only a sample solution to this scenario.
2. Users I'm Following Channel
Note: although this is an option it's probably only appropriate for smaller numbers of users
In this scenario a user sends their status update to the server, the server performs a lookup of which users are interested in the update and triggers and update even on a channel for each interested user.
For example, give users UserA, UserB and UserC each of those users will subscribe to their own update channel; UserA-followers-updates, UserB-followers-updates, and UserC-followers-updates respectively. If each of these users follows UserZ then when UserZ makes as status update that update is published on each of those channels.
This may also sound inefficient, however it is possible to trigger the same event on 10 channels at a time. So in the above example it would only require one call to the Pusher HTTP API to send the status update to all interested users. More information on multi-channel event publishing here.
I am running Asterisk 11 and using MySQL realtime. I've used FreePBX previously, and it shows all details how many users are registered in realtime. I can check a user registration if I type show peer username on Asterisk CLI. However, I would like to know whether a specific user has registered SIP server or not in realtime.
Example
UserA - registered
UserB - unregistered
UserC - registered
I checked sip_buddies table in MySQL, and it only shows regseconds. I couldn't figure out whether a user is registered or not with this information. Does anyone how to check user's registration in realtime?
You have 3 options
1) (bad one) do command "sip show peers" (rtcachefriends has to be set to yes)
2) (better one) create an event listener, which will listen for an event via AMI and store that info.
3) (db variant) Set
rtupdate=yes
rtautoclear=yes
and check in db registration time. Downside - a lot of db writes.
This is not the specific answer, but is a relevant solution to different Asterisk setups. Some deployments use openSIPS as a clients registration proxy (it's better than the baked in SIP capabilities of Asterisk, even with the new pjsip stack). In this case "sip show peers" will be empty. In that case you can use the Management Interface via the opensipsctl application. opensipsctl ul show on the proxy will show all clients registered to the proxy.
I am developing a chat application for android and i phone . Here i am to make persistent groups like whatsapp where members remain joined even after they get offline and after getting online they get their offline group messages. As it is not possible with XMPP so i am thinking about to go for rabbitmq and ejabberd both.
Here is how i want to make group-
When a group is created , an exchange is created in rabbitmq and each group members will add this user to its roster.
Now when a user send a message to rabbitmq then it will be delivered to members who are subscribed to that exchange and offline messages will remain in the queue till user gets online.
My Questions are-
Is it the correct way which i am thinking?
How much exchanges can we create in rabbitmq and how much memory an exchange takes ?
How much messages a queue can store and how much memory it takes?
Should i use it or simply go with XMPP-MUC for group chat?