Spring Integration two way communication with gps devices - gps

We are using spring integration application for data receiption from gps devices. For current configuration we are able to receive data from device also respose sent back to device through same connection
current configuration is as
#SpringBootApplication
#IntegrationComponentScan
public class SpringIntegrationApplication extends SpringBootServletInitializer{
private Integer TIMEOUT=1000*60*10;
#Value("${TCP_PORT}")
private Integer TCP_PORT;
public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException {
ConfigurableApplicationContext ctx = SpringApplication.run(SpringIntegrationApplication.class, args);
System.in.read();
ctx.close();
}
#Bean
TcpNetServerConnectionFactory cf(){
TcpNetServerConnectionFactory connectionFactory=new TcpNetServerConnectionFactory(TCP_PORT);
connectionFactory.setSerializer(new CustomSerializerDeserializer());
connectionFactory.setDeserializer(new CustomSerializerDeserializer());
connectionFactory.setSoTimeout(TIMEOUT);
return connectionFactory;
}
#Bean
TcpInboundGateway tcpGate(){
TcpInboundGateway gateway=new TcpInboundGateway();
gateway.setConnectionFactory(cf());
gateway.setRequestChannel(requestChannel());
gateway.setRequestTimeout(TIMEOUT);
return gateway;
}
#Bean
public MessageChannel requestChannel(){
return new DirectChannel();
}
}
and message end point
#MessageEndpoint
public class Echo {
#ServiceActivator(inputChannel="requestChannel")
public byte[] echo(byte[] in,#SuppressWarnings("deprecation") #Header("ip_address") String ip){
//here we receive packet data in bytes from gps device
return "".getBytes();//string will contains expected result for device.
}
Above configuartion works fine for one way communication. but we want to implement two way communication. What we want after connection established between server and device we want to send message explicitely.To send command through server we dont know ip and port of device, so how can we send command through server to connected device.
I am trying following solution
created oubound channel adapter
#Bean
public TcpSendingMessageHandler tcpSendingMessageHandler() {
System.out.println("Creating outbound adapter");
TcpSendingMessageHandler outbound = new TcpSendingMessageHandler();
return outbound;
}
then created gateway for explicite message send, this will be called from service where we want to send data explicitely
#MessagingGateway(defaultRequestChannel="toTcp")
public static interface tcpSendService {
public byte [] send(String string);
}
After calling gate way following service activator invoked where we are setting connection ip and port, these ip and ports will be from connection established while receiving data from device
#ServiceActivator(inputChannel="toTcp", outputChannel="fromTcp")
public String send(String in){
System.out.println(new String(in));
TcpNetClientConnectionFactory factory = new TcpNetClientConnectionFactory(ip_extracted_from_inbound_connection, port_extarcted_from_inbound_connection);
factory.start();
tcpSendingMessageHandler.setConnectionFactory(factory);
return in;
}
// for ip and port extraction i am using following service which is inbound sevice
#ServiceActivator(inputChannel="requestChannel")
public byte[] echo(byte[] in,#Header("ip_address") String ip){
System.out.println(new String(in)+ " ; IP : "+ip);
for (String connectionId : factory.getOpenConnectionIds()) {
if(!lastConection.contains(ip))
lastConection = connectionId;
}
return "hello".getBytes();
}
For service activator i am setting new TcpNetClientConnectionFactory every time service called. Ip and port are extracted from TcpNetServerConnectionFactory. whenever device connects with server i am saving its connection ip and port, using these ip and port for data transmission through server but i am getting connection timeout issue.
Kindly help me out and suggest me a solution over it.
Thank you.

Replace the gateway with a pair of Collaborating Outbound and Inbound Channel Adapters.
In order to send arbitrary messages to a connection, you must set the ip_connectionId header.
The challenge, though, is how to direct the reply to the gateway. You would need to capture the replyChannel header from the request and, when a reply is received for that ip_connectionId, set the replyChannel headers.
This will only work, though, if you have only one request/reply outstanding to each device at a time, unless there is some data in the reply that can be used to correlate it to a request.
Another challenge is race conditions, where the device and the server initiate a request at the same time. You would need to look at data in the inbound message to see if it's a request or reply.

Related

Webflux, with Websocket how to prevent subscribing twice of reactive redis messaging operation

I have a websocket implementation using redis messaging operation on webflux. And what it does is it listens to topic and returns the values via websocket endpoint.
The problem I have is each time a user sends a message via websocket to the endpoint it seems a brand new redis subscription is made, resulting in the accumulation of subscribers on the redis message topic and the websocket responses are increased with the number of redis topic message subscribtions as well (example user sends 3 messages, redis topic subscriptions are increased to three, websocket connection responses three times).
Would like to know if there is a way to reuse the same subscription to the messaging topic so it would prevent multiple redis topic subscriptions.
The code I use is as follows:
Websocket Handler
public class SendingMessageHandler implements WebSocketHandler {
private final Gson gson = new Gson();
private final MessagingService messagingService;
public SendingMessageHandler(MessagingService messagingService) {
this.messagingService = messagingService;
}
#Override
public Mono<Void> handle(WebSocketSession session) {
Flux<WebSocketMessage> stringFlux = session.receive()
.map(WebSocketMessage::getPayloadAsText)
.flatMap(inputData ->
messagingService.playGame(inputData)
.map(data ->
session.textMessage(gson.toJson(data))
)
);
return session.send(stringFlux);
}
}
Message Handling service
public class MessagingService{
private final ReactiveRedisOperations<String, GamePubSub> reactiveRedisOperations;
public MessagingService(ReactiveRedisOperations<String, GamePubSub> reactiveRedisOperations) {
this.reactiveRedisOperations = reactiveRedisOperations;
}
public Flux<Object> playGame(UserInput userInput){
return reactiveRedisOperations.listenTo("TOPIC_NAME");
}
}
Thank you in advance.
Instead of using ReactiveRedisOperations, MessageListener is the way to go here. You can register a listener once, and use the following as the listener.
data -> session.textMessage(gson.toJson(data))
The registration should happen only once at the beginning of the connection. You can override void afterConnectionEstablished(WebSocketSession session) of SendingMessageHandler to accomplish this. That way a new subscription created per every new Websocket connection, per every message.
Also, don't forget to override afterConnectionClosed, and unsubscribe from the redis topic, and clean up the listener within it.
Instructions on how to use MessageListener.

How to handle errors when RabbitMQ exchange doesn't exist (and messages are sent through a messaging gateway interface)

I'd like to know what is the canonical way to handle errors in the following situation (code is a minimal working example):
Messages are sent through a messaging gateway which defines its defaultRequestChannel and a #Gateway method:
#MessagingGateway(name = MY_GATEWAY, defaultRequestChannel = INPUT_CHANNEL)
public interface MyGateway
{
#Gateway
public void sendMessage(String message);
Messages are read from the channel and sent through an AMQP outbound adapter:
#Bean
public IntegrationFlow apiMutuaInputFlow()
{
return IntegrationFlows
.from(INPUT_CHANNEL)
.handle(Amqp.outboundAdapter(rabbitConfig.myTemplate()))
.get();
}
The RabbitMQ configuration is skeletal:
#Configuration
public class RabbitMqConfiguration
{
#Autowired
private ConnectionFactory rabbitConnectionFactory;
#Bean
public RabbitTemplate myTemplate()
{
RabbitTemplate r = new RabbitTemplate(rabbitConnectionFactory);
r.setExchange(INPUT_QUEUE_NAME);
r.setConnectionFactory(rabbitConnectionFactory);
return r;
}
}
I generally include a bean to define the RabbitMQ configuration I'm relying upon (exchange, queues and bindings), and it actually works fine. But while testing for failure scenarios, I found a situation I don't know how to properly handle using Spring Integration. The steps are:
Remove the beans that configure RabbitMQ
Run the flow against an unconfigured, vanilla RabbitMQ instance.
What I would expect is:
The message cannot be delivered because the exchange cannot be found.
Either I find some way to get an exception from the messaging gateway on the caller thread.
Either I find some way to otherwise intercept this error.
What I find:
The message cannot be delivered because the exchange cannot be found, and indeed this error message is logged every time the #Gateway method is called.
2020-02-11 08:18:40.746 ERROR 42778 --- [ 127.0.0.1:5672] o.s.a.r.c.CachingConnectionFactory : Channel shutdown: channel error; protocol method: #method<channel.close>(reply-code=404, reply-text=NOT_FOUND - no exchange 'my.exchange' in vhost '/', class-id=60, method-id=40)
The gateway is not failing, nor have I find a way to configure it to do so (e.g.: adding throws clauses to the interface methods, configuring a transactional channel, setting wait-for-confirm and a confirm-timeout).
I haven't found a way to otherwise catch that CachingConectionFactory error (e.g.: configuring a transactional channel).
I haven't found a way to catch an error message on another channel (specified on the gateway's errorChannel), or in Spring Integration's default errorChannel.
I understand such a failure may not be propagated upstream by the messaging gateway, whose job is isolating callers from the messaging API, but I definitely expect such an error to be interceptable.
Could you point me in the right direction?
Thank you.
RabbitMQ is inherently async, which is one reason that it performs so well.
You can, however, block the caller by enabling confirms and returns and setting this option:
/**
* Set to true if you want to block the calling thread until a publisher confirm has
* been received. Requires a template configured for returns. If a confirm is not
* received within the confirm timeout or a negative acknowledgment or returned
* message is received, an exception will be thrown. Does not apply to the gateway
* since it blocks awaiting the reply.
* #param waitForConfirm true to block until the confirmation or timeout is received.
* #since 5.2
* #see #setConfirmTimeout(long)
* #see #setMultiSend(boolean)
*/
public void setWaitForConfirm(boolean waitForConfirm) {
this.waitForConfirm = waitForConfirm;
}
(With the DSL .waitForConfirm(true)).
This also requires a confirm correlation expression. Here's an example from one of the test cases
#Bean
public IntegrationFlow flow(RabbitTemplate template) {
return f -> f.handle(Amqp.outboundAdapter(template)
.exchangeName("")
.routingKeyFunction(msg -> msg.getHeaders().get("rk", String.class))
.confirmCorrelationFunction(msg -> msg)
.waitForConfirm(true));
}
#Bean
public CachingConnectionFactory cf() {
CachingConnectionFactory ccf = new CachingConnectionFactory(
RabbitAvailableCondition.getBrokerRunning().getConnectionFactory());
ccf.setPublisherConfirmType(CachingConnectionFactory.ConfirmType.CORRELATED);
ccf.setPublisherReturns(true);
return ccf;
}
#Bean
public RabbitTemplate template(ConnectionFactory cf) {
RabbitTemplate rabbitTemplate = new RabbitTemplate(cf);
rabbitTemplate.setMandatory(true); // for returns
rabbitTemplate.setReceiveTimeout(10_000);
return rabbitTemplate;
}
Bear in mind this will slow down things considerably (similar to using transactions) so you may want to reconsider whether you want to do this on every send (unless performance is not an issue).

Cross domain policy file over net.tcp for WCF servicehost and Silverlight 5

I have a locally hosted WCF service and a silverlight 5 app that communicates with it. By default silverlight tries to obtain the cross domain policy file over HTTP when making calls to the WCF service. I need to change this so that the policy file is served over net.tcp port 943 instead.
I have setup a local tcp listener that serves up the policy file over port 943 and i have followed this technique whereby i make a dummy socket connection in order to obtain the policy file over tcp as it is only retrieved once per application lifetime. The tcp server is being hit as expected and i am getting SocketError property value as Success (though i must note, the first time i hit the tcp server after starting the listener, the result is always access denied).
From what i can tell, the policy file is either invalid as the silverlight application as still unable to connect or the above mentioned technique does not work with silverlight 5.
What i would like to know is if what i am doing is possible & im doing it correctly, otherwise if there is an alternative means to have the policy file successfully downloaded over tcp and removing the need for retrieving it over HTTP.
Thanks
I wrote a long post about hosting silverlight in WPF - and using WCF with a http listener here:
How can I host a Silverlight 4 application in a WPF 4 application?
Now while not directly answering your question, it does show how to create a http version of the policy file.
I have also written something that serves up a policy listener over port 943, but I can't find where I posted the source - so I'll keep digging. As far as I remember though, silverlight does a cascade find of the policy file, if it doesn't get a connection on port 80, it'll then look on port 943.
I hope this is of some help somewhere.
Ok, here is the policy listener I had for net.TCP transport i.e. not HTTP based. I presume you have sorted this by now, sorry for the delay. It may well be of use to someone else now.
I was looking for the MS thing that said they cascade from HTTP to TCP, however, I can't, and therefore have to assume it was bunk and then changed.
Either way, if you call using a net.TCP service, and want a listener for it, this code should help:
#region "Policy Listener"
// This is a simple policy listener
// that provides the cross domain policy file for silverlight applications
// this provides them with a network access policy
public class SocketPolicyListener
{
private TcpListener listener = null;
private TcpClient Client = null;
byte[] Data;
private NetworkStream netStream = null;
private string listenaddress = "";
// This could be read from a file on the disk, but for now, this gives the silverlight application
// the ability to access any domain, and all the silverlight ports 4502-4534
string policyfile = "<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?><access-policy><cross-domain-access><policy><allow-from><domain uri='*' /></allow-from><grant-to><socket-resource port='4502-4534' protocol='tcp' /></grant-to></policy></cross-domain-access></access-policy>";
// the request that we're expecting from the client
private string _policyRequestString = "<policy-file-request/>";
// Listen for our clients to connect
public void Listen(string ListenIPAddress)
{
listenaddress = ListenIPAddress;
if (listener == null)
{
listener = new TcpListener(IPAddress.Parse(ListenIPAddress), 943);
// Try and stop our clients from lingering, keeping the socket open:
LingerOption lo = new LingerOption(true, 1);
listener.Server.SetSocketOption(SocketOptionLevel.Socket, SocketOptionName.Linger,lo);
}
listener.Start();
WaitForClientConnect();
}
private void WaitForClientConnect()
{
listener.BeginAcceptTcpClient(new AsyncCallback(OnClientConnected), listener);
}
public void StopPolicyListener()
{
if (Client.Connected)
{
// Should never reach this point, as clients
// are closed if they request the policy
// only clients that open the connection and
// do not submit a policy request will remain unclosed
Client.Close();
}
listener.Stop();
}
public void RestartPolicyListener()
{
listener.Start();
}
// When a client connects:
private void OnClientConnected(IAsyncResult ar)
{
if (ar.IsCompleted)
{
// Get the listener that handles the client request.
TcpListener listener = (TcpListener)ar.AsyncState;
// End the operation and display the received data on
// the console.
Client = listener.EndAcceptTcpClient(ar);
// Try and stop our clients from lingering, keeping the socket open:
LingerOption lo = new LingerOption(true, 1);
Client.Client.SetSocketOption(SocketOptionLevel.Socket, SocketOptionName.Linger, lo);
// Set our receive callback
Data = new byte[1024];
netStream = Client.GetStream();
netStream.BeginRead(Data, 0, 1024, ReceiveMessage, null);
}
WaitForClientConnect();
}
// Read from clients.
public void ReceiveMessage(IAsyncResult ar)
{
int bufferLength;
try
{
bufferLength = Client.GetStream().EndRead(ar);
// Receive the message from client side.
string messageReceived = Encoding.ASCII.GetString(Data, 0, bufferLength);
if (messageReceived == _policyRequestString)
{
// Send our policy file, as it's been requested
SendMessage(policyfile);
// Have to close the connection or the
// silverlight client will wait around.
Client.Close();
}
else
{
// Continue reading from client.
Client.GetStream().BeginRead(Data, 0, Data.Length, ReceiveMessage, null);
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
throw new Exception(Client.Client.RemoteEndPoint.ToString() + " is disconnected.");
}
}
// Send the message.
public void SendMessage(string message)
{
try
{
byte[] bytesToSend = System.Text.Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(message);
//Client.Client.Send(bytesToSend,SocketFlags.None);
Client.GetStream().Write(bytesToSend,0, bytesToSend.Length);
Client.GetStream().Flush();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
throw ex;
}
}
}
#endregion

UDP broadcast of WCF Service address

Im have a lab-environment in VMware with a WS2008R2-server and a W7-client. Im trying to broadcast a WCF-service-address from the server and receive this in the client. Im using System.Net.Sockets in C# .NET and I can successfuly send data from the server. I looks okay with WinDump at least. But when I try to receive this on the client it fails. I cant understand where the problem is..? The client can communicate with the server in other ways and with my WCF-service if I manually enter its address. I have turned of my firewalls in the lab-environment just in case.
[Update]
I checked WinDump on my client-vm and the same udp-message showes up here as well so it seem to be able to receive the broadcast. But why arent the ReceieveFrom-method returning anything? Have I setup the client socket wrong? Should it bind to the Any-address or to its local ip? Neither works...
[/Update]
Heres the server-code:
public static class MulticastServer
{
static Socket socket;
static IPEndPoint ep = new IPEndPoint(IPAddress.Broadcast, 9050);
public static void Open()
{
socket = new Socket(AddressFamily.InterNetwork, SocketType.Dgram, ProtocolType.Udp);
socket.SetSocketOption(SocketOptionLevel.Socket, SocketOptionName.Broadcast, true);
}
public static void Send(string message)
{
socket.SendTo(Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(message), ep);
}
public static void Close()
{
socket.Close();
}
}
And the client:
public static class MulticastClient
{
public static string ReceiveOne()
{
Socket socket = new Socket(AddressFamily.InterNetwork, SocketType.Dgram, ProtocolType.Udp);
IPEndPoint ep = new IPEndPoint(IPAddress.Any, 9050);
socket.Bind(ep);
byte[] data = new byte[1024];
EndPoint e = (EndPoint)ep;
int i = socket.ReceiveFrom(data, ref e);
socket.Close();
return Encoding.ASCII.GetString(data, 0, i);
}
}
I'm not sure where your current problem is but by reading your question I immediately knew that you are reinventing a wheel. Upgrade to .NET 4.0 and use WCF Discovery which is exactly for this purpose - UDP based searching for service with given contract and UDP based announcements about services. Moreover it is based on WS-Discovery protocol so I guess it should be interoperable. Isn't it better than custom solution?

Authorization with Websphere MQ 6

I have the server side of IBM's WebSphere MQ version 6 on a virtual machine running Windows Server 2003, sitting on a Vista desktop. The desktop has the client installed.
I've got a little test program (from their code samples) that puts a message on a queue and takes it off again. This program worked when run on the server directly with the server binding. However, I can't get it to work from the client side with the client binding.
The error I get is CompCode 2, Reason 2035, which is an authorization failure.
I suspect this has to do with the fact that the program runs under my user by default, which is on a domain that the virtual machine doesn't know about (and can't access).
I have set up a local user on the vm that I'd like to connect as (user: websphere, password: websphere), but I'm not clear on how to get this all to work. I have the code that I'm using below, and I've tried various combinations of security exit settings on the channel and endpoints, but I can't get away from 2035.
Anyone have experience with this? Help would be much appreciated!
Code:
using System;
using System.Collections;
using IBM.WMQ;
class MQSample
{
// The type of connection to use, this can be:-
// MQC.TRANSPORT_MQSERIES_BINDINGS for a server connection.
// MQC.TRANSPORT_MQSERIES_CLIENT for a non-XA client connection
// MQC.TRANSPORT_MQSERIES_XACLIENT for an XA client connection
// MQC.TRANSPORT_MQSERIES_MANAGED for a managed client connection
const String connectionType = MQC.TRANSPORT_MQSERIES_CLIENT;
// Define the name of the queue manager to use (applies to all connections)
const String qManager = "QM_vm_win2003";
// Define the name of your host connection (applies to client connections only)
const String hostName = "vm-win2003";
// Define the name of the channel to use (applies to client connections only)
const String channel = "S_vm_win2003";
/// <summary>
/// Initialise the connection properties for the connection type requested
/// </summary>
/// <param name="connectionType">One of the MQC.TRANSPORT_MQSERIES_ values</param>
static Hashtable init(String connectionType)
{
Hashtable connectionProperties = new Hashtable();
// Add the connection type
connectionProperties.Add(MQC.TRANSPORT_PROPERTY, connectionType);
// Set up the rest of the connection properties, based on the
// connection type requested
switch (connectionType)
{
case MQC.TRANSPORT_MQSERIES_BINDINGS:
break;
case MQC.TRANSPORT_MQSERIES_CLIENT:
connectionProperties.Add(MQC.HOST_NAME_PROPERTY, hostName);
connectionProperties.Add(MQC.CHANNEL_PROPERTY, channel);
connectionProperties.Add(MQC.USER_ID_PROPERTY, "websphere");
connectionProperties.Add(MQC.PASSWORD_PROPERTY, "websphere");
break;
}
return connectionProperties;
}
/// <summary>
/// The main entry point for the application.
/// </summary>
[STAThread]
static int Main(string[] args)
{
try
{
Hashtable connectionProperties = init(connectionType);
// Create a connection to the queue manager using the connection
// properties just defined
MQQueueManager qMgr = new MQQueueManager(qManager, connectionProperties);
// Set up the options on the queue we wish to open
int openOptions = MQC.MQOO_INPUT_AS_Q_DEF | MQC.MQOO_OUTPUT;
// Now specify the queue that we wish to open,and the open options
MQQueue system_default_local_queue =
qMgr.AccessQueue("clq_default_vm_sql2000", openOptions);
// Define a WebSphere MQ message, writing some text in UTF format
MQMessage hello_world = new MQMessage();
hello_world.WriteUTF("Hello World!");
// Specify the message options
MQPutMessageOptions pmo = new MQPutMessageOptions();
// accept the defaults,
// same as MQPMO_DEFAULT
// Put the message on the queue
system_default_local_queue.Put(hello_world, pmo);
// Get the message back again
// First define a WebSphere MQ message buffer to receive the message
MQMessage retrievedMessage = new MQMessage();
retrievedMessage.MessageId = hello_world.MessageId;
// Set the get message options
MQGetMessageOptions gmo = new MQGetMessageOptions(); //accept the defaults
//same as MQGMO_DEFAULT
// Get the message off the queue
system_default_local_queue.Get(retrievedMessage, gmo);
// Prove we have the message by displaying the UTF message text
String msgText = retrievedMessage.ReadUTF();
Console.WriteLine("The message is: {0}", msgText);
// Close the queue
system_default_local_queue.Close();
// Disconnect from the queue manager
qMgr.Disconnect();
}
//If an error has occurred in the above,try to identify what went wrong.
//Was it a WebSphere MQ error?
catch (MQException ex)
{
Console.WriteLine("A WebSphere MQ error occurred: {0}", ex.ToString());
}
catch (System.Exception ex)
{
Console.WriteLine("A System error occurred: {0}", ex.ToString());
}
Console.ReadLine();
return 0;
}//end of start
}//end of sample
With Windows-to-Windows connections, WMQ will pass the SID as well as the "short ID" which in this case would be "websphere". This is a little better authorization than you get with non-Windows WMQ which only uses the short ID. The problem is that someone on a non-windows server can connect using the short ID "websphere" and since there is no SID WMQ will accept the connection as thought it were the Windows account.
Two ways to address this. On the QMgr host you can run setmqaut commands to authorize the SID you are actually using to connect. The VM must be able to inquire on the domain where the Windows account lives and the setmqaut command must use -p user#domain syntax.
Alternatively, you can just use the locally defined ID in the MCAUSER of the channel like
ALTER CHL(channel name) CHLTYPE(SVRCONN) MCAUSER('webaphere#vm')
...where 'vm' is the name of the virtual machine and you've authorized the account with setmqaut commands or by putting it into the mqm or administrators group.
Keep in mind this is only for testing! Any channel with a blank or administrative MCAUSER can not only administer WMQ but also execute arbitrary commands on the underlying host server. In the real world you would create accounts with access to queues and the QMgr but not access to administer and you'd put those into all MCAUSER values, then set MCAUSER('nobody') for all the SYSTEM.DEF and SYSTEM.AUTO channels.
Lots more on this available on my web site t-rob.net in the MQ and Links pages. Also, check out:
Comment lines: T.Rob Wyatt: What you didn't know you didn’t know about WebSphere MQ security
Comment lines: T.Rob Wyatt: WebSphere MQ security heats up
I used to have the same problem. the solution, we need to assign user window account to MQA group or administrator group. Then, add user name of the window account to MCA user in the channel.
Hope this helps