I have an application which uses SignalR and some how my clients can't connect to the application through TCP protocol.
The question is what protocol SignalR uses for Hub Connection? if it's TCP then can i make it UDP protocol?
SignalR uses Websockets to communicate between the clients and the server.
If for some reason Websockets are not available, then it will fall back to other transport mechanisms.
As far as I know, by default, all standard transport mechanisms are via HTTP, so unless you can provide specific code for client and server I am not sure we xan be of much help.
Anyway, check the official documentation for a full list of used transports and fallback.
Hope this helps.
Best of luck!
Related
On the Internet, if you need fast,
secure server-to-server communication,
and you can specify which firewall
ports are open, NetTcpBinding can
prove very valuable.
a) Is text implying that with some other connection protocols, such as HTTP, we don't need to check for open firewall ports?
b) Why would NetTcpBinding only be useful for server-to-server communications, but not for client-to-server communications?
thank you
a) When you deploy to an enterprise, you usually don't have control over their external firewall. The setup of their firewall is made by network administrators following an enterprise wide policy. External firewalls almost always allow outgoing HTTP requests (otherwise you couldn't browse the web). Some corporate firewalls block outgoing TCP requests, which means you cannot use netTcpBinding. As an example, see this question for somebody trying to deal with that issue. If you KNOW that the firewall of every one of your customers will allow outgoing TCP, then NetTcpBinding is an appropriate choice.
b) Who says NetTcpBinding is only useful for server-to-server communications? You can deploy a client-server application into an enterprise, and providing the clients and the servers are all within the intranet, then NetTcpBinding is an appropriate choice of binding.
WCF supports several different protocols for communicating. My WCF services are deployed on the same machine only. I just wanted to know whether TCP is more effecient than HTTP or should i go with HTTP?
If your WCF services are on the same machine, use named pipes. I've found this flow chart helpful.
.
If your service will only run on the same machine, then try using NetNamedPipeBinding.
Of course, in any case, you should measure the performance you receive using realistic test data.
The advantage of HTTP - Application layer (7 in the OSI model) - is
close to user (human) usage, via text commands (and many responses)
one can use telnet (to a port where an application dialogs via http protocol) for instance and issue some simple commands to dialog with the remote server
the http protocol deals for you with otherwise complex actions
HTTP is (usually) based on TCP (transport) / IP (Network). Thus all the advantages described above bear a performance penalty. You could define yourself an application with a more flexible protocol (at the user/application level) but it usually requires more programming, like dealing with issues that were already included in HTTP. Also, as the name protocol implies, nobody will understand your own protocol if you define one, unlike http. You'll have to design, program and build not only the server side, but also the client side. Clients will have to install your program and use it.
HTTP is built on top of TCP, therefore TCP will be definitely faster. Also HTTP has to parse the text headers which is another bunch of time spent. If your use case allows that, go with TCP.
HTTP is a protocol on top of TCP, so it's most likely faster NOT to add an additional protocol on top. See also the OSI Model.
You can clearly see that HTTP is on top of TCP here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model
OR
even better here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP/IP_model
As has been said before, TCP is the transmission control protocol, HTTP is a protocol on top. You can create your own custom protocol that could be more efficient as it would not have some of the http baggage. I had to do this to grab frame numbers from a video stream being recorded on a remote computer.
How can two computers that are on separate networks connect to each other using UDP? I know that you can do this by setting up port forwarding but I services like Xbox Live don't work through that. How is this possible and is there a way to obtain an address to another computer on a separate network?
EDIT
Ok thanks for the help I am using objc so I ended up using asyncsocket and portmapper for doing router configuration.
http://code.google.com/p/cocoaasyncsocket/
http://www.codingmonkeys.de/portmap/
First, obtaining the public IP of a remote computer:
Use dynamic dns.
Make your own protocol and run a server to keep the list of users and IP.
Working out incoming UDP packets:
Use client/server communication instead of peer-to-peer.
Use UPnP protocol (i think xbox does this) to ask your router for a port. Not all routers support or have UPnP enabled.
Use TURN/STUN protocol. This protocol has been designed to bypass UDP nat. This requires an external server, but there are free servers available.
I think there are libraries for UPnP and STUN, but i can't tell you for sure.
LatinSuD are right, STUN is good solution - check out STUN protocol implementation for iOS https://github.com/soulfly/STUN-iOS
I want to write a simple SMPP Server that basically forwards traffic to another SMPP server (C#, PHP). What are the things I need to know? How do I proceed?
With regards to Goran's comment, one possible solution would be a simple tcp proxy such as simpleproxy.
From the Ubuntu package description:
simpleproxy acts as a simple TCP proxy. It opens a listening socket on
the local machine and forwards any connection to a remote host. It can be
run as a daemon or through inetd.
Olaseni,
I've done something similar in the past, but i used perl. What i did was taking a port forwarding proxy which i downloaded from accordata.com. (port-proxy.pl)
I modified this to use the NET::SMPP module to validate PDU's when reading the incoming socket. Once the PDU was of type "Bind_request" i would validate against a dbase, replace credentials if validation was successfull and than forward or if credentials were not validated, issue a reject to the client and disconnect. Alternatively if the PDU contained anything else, i would forward using the logic that was already existing in port-proxy.pl.
You can write simple smpp lib and forward smpp traffic from many applications to the one smpp connection to the sms provider
I can advice you jsmpp lib, but it's for java. It's very simple and cool lib. Many low level things happen behind the scenes and you can focus on your business logic
Find more here
I have written exactly what you are asking for in vb.net
What i did was listen for inbound PDU (connect, bind, sms, and disconnect too) identifying each inbound connection uniquely - for the authentication bit,
then i forward the traffic onward to the delivery smsc.
Your SMPP service simply needs to listen for inbound PDU packets... as well as send heartbeat packets to the connected clients, if required.
In my office building we have laptops on multiple floors all running a WCF Service. When WCF services communicate with each other, will a message for an out-of-range device automatically reach it by multi-hopping? Does WCF/the WLAN device driver handle this? Or do I have to detect if a device is not contactable/out-of-range and implement hopping in my own service?
As long as you have a connection from your WCF client to the service - yes, all avenues will be used. You shouldn't have to concern yourself with things like what network path your messages take - the network just has to be present and stable for the duration of a call ;-)
There's nothing in WCF to deal with this, really - this should be handled way lower in the network stack, by the driver or the OS.
Short answer
With WCF can do either or both of these:
Rely on an underlying protocol like IP to handle roaming
Use custom channel code that handles retries, roaming, etc the way you want it
No special mechanism for enhancing roaming is provided in the WCF classes Microsoft provides, but the framework itself is easily capable of supporting this seamlessly if you write or find a channel implementation to do this.
Full answer
WCF is not an on-the-wire protocol. It is a framework that allows you to communicate using a wide variety of protocols and network stacks. This allows you to use the same client and server code whether you are using HTTPS, raw TCP, named pipes, or any other protocol.
WCF ships with many channels in the box, and you can add your own. For example if you want to communicate over BlueTooth or IRDA, just create a new channel that talks these protocols and you can use your WCF services over it. These channels can also be found online or purchased from vendors.
Most networking today is done using the IP protocol, and if you are using WCF to communicate between desktop machines you will probably be using some protocol(s) on top of IP, for example TCP or HTTP. In this case, IP's normal routing rules will be used, so if the two machines can exchane IP packets you can communicate using WCF.
So if your WiFi access points allow seamless roaming you will be able to tap into that functionality using WCF.
If your WiFi routing doesn't have seamless roaming, you will have to do some extra work if you want to maintain a connection during roaming. Specifically you will need to create a channel that will respond to a closed connetion by re-resolving the server nane and retrying the request. Of course you will have to use DNS or another protocol so the server can update its registration as its IP address changes.
WCF is flexible enough to allow you to create such a channel and use it without your application code ever realizing it. But nothing like this comes in the box: You would have to build it, or download or purchase it.
it has nothing to do with WCF....
if there is a connection between the computers, on the IP, then the message will get through...