cedar2025 / Xboard

基于V2board二次开发支持新协议新特性的高性能面板
MIT License
1.37k stars 325 forks source link

[Question] Why forcing subdomain direct? #80

Closed JobberRT closed 4 months ago

JobberRT commented 4 months ago

The XBoard version number you are using

v0.1.9

Briefly describe the problem you are experiencing

Why XBoard makes subdomain direct? I can't see advantage of this behavior.

For many webiste that using Cloudflare as their CDN, it's common that these sites are being TCP Reset. If using DIRECT, then it will be impossible to subsribe. And if not using DIRECT, at least you left us a spare to workaround.

For example: Use another device as proxy server for the first subscription. After that(and no DOMAIN,subdomain,DIRECT rule), we can update the subscription base on the config we downloaded

https://github.com/cedar2025/Xboard/blob/3241ce618bfa554d9b3e062957bf4d8c02e71ce0/app/Protocols/ClashMeta.php#L81-L85

cedar2025 commented 4 months ago

If the network cannot connect to the subscriber, it will indeed cause inconvenience in updating subscriptions, but if DIRECT is not used, it will cause other problems. For example:

Unable to obtain the user's IP to decide to issue the designated node When switching to an unavailable node, updating the subscription will fail. You should solve your problem yourself, for example

Change to a new domain name Introspect and modify the protocol file to meet your needs

JobberRT commented 4 months ago

If the network cannot connect to the subscriber, it will indeed cause inconvenience in updating subscriptions, but if DIRECT is not used, it will cause other problems. For example:

Unable to obtain the user's IP to decide to issue the designated node无法获取用户的IP以决定是否发放指定节点 When switching to an unavailable node, updating the subscription will fail.切换到不可用节点时,更新订阅将失败。 You should solve your problem yourself, for example你应该自己解决问题,例如

Change to a new domain name Introspect and modify the protocol file to meet your needs

I see, XBoard add a new feature with different IP get different node. That's a point. I've already modified the Protocol file, thanks