I browsed the python socket docs and google for two days but I did not find any answer. Yeah I am a network programming newbie :)
I would like to implement some LAN chatting system with specific function for our needs. I am at the very beginning. I was able to implement a client-server model where the client connects to the server (socket.SOCK_STREAM) and they are able to change messages. I want to step forward. I want the client to discover the LAN with a broadcast how many other clients are available.
I failed. Is it possible that a socket.SOCK_STREAM type socket could not be used for this task?
If so, what are my opportunities? using udp packets? How I have to listen for brodcast messages/packets?
The broadcast is defined by the destination address.
For example if your own ip is 192.168.1.2, the broadcast address would be 192.168.1.255 (in most cases)
It is not related directly to python and will probably not be in its documentation. You are searching for network "general" knowledge, to a level much higher than sockets programming
*EDIT
Yes you are right, you cannot use SOCK_STREAM. SOCK_STREAM defines TCP communication. You should use UDP for broadcasting with socket.SOCK_DGRAM
Related
I am trying to make a python socket server based on UDP.
The point is that we need to receive data from the Java client socket server and the python UDP protocol socket server must throw JSON data to React in the front.
I have the level of knowledge to make a simple UDP chat server, so I'm worried a lot now.
I am currently reading the django channels official documentation.
Does django-channeles provide easy configuration to use UDP protocol as well?
There is a specification for raw UDP in the docs. UDP is not reliable as some of the data may be lost, so it is not widely used. If you must use it, you have to implement a UDP consumer based on the specification using the websocket consumers as a template
I am working on a project where I have a client server model in python. I set up a server to monitor requests and send back data. PYZMQ supports: tcp, udp, pgm, epgm, inproc and ipc. I have been using tcp for interprocess communication, but have no idea what i should use for sending a request over the internet to a server. I simply need something to put in:
socket.bind(BIND_ADDRESS)
DIAGRAM: Client Communicating over internet to server running a program
Any particular reason you're not using ipc or inproc for interprocess communication?
Other than that, generally, you can consider tcp the universal communicator; it's not always the best choice, but no matter what (so long as you actually have an IP address) it will work.
Here's what you need to know when making a choice between transports:
PGM/EPGM are multicast transports - the idea is that you send one message and it gets delivered as a single message until the last possible moment where it will be broken up into multiple messages, one for each receiver. Unless you absolutely know you need this, you don't need this.
IPC/Inproc are for interprocess communication... if you're communicating between different threads in the same process, or different processes on the same logical host, then these might be appropriate. You get the benefit of a little less overhead. If you might ever add new logical hosts, this is probably not appropriate.
Russle Borogove enumerates the difference between TCP and UDP well. Typically you'll want to use TCP. Only if absolute speed is more important than reliability then you'll use UDP.
It was always my understanding that UDP wasn't supported by ZMQ, so if it's there it's probably added by the pyzmq binding.
Also, I took a look at your diagram - you probably want the server ZMQ socket to bind and the client ZMQ socket to connect... there are some reasons why you might reverse this, but as a general rule the server is considered the "reliable" peer, and the client is the "transient" peer, and you want the "reliable" peer to bind, the "transient" peer to connect.
Over the internet, TCP or UDP are the usual choices. I don't know if pyzmq has its own delivery guarantees on top of the transport protocol. If it doesn't, TCP will guarantee in-order delivery of all messages, while UDP may drop messages if the network is congested.
If you don't know what you want, TCP is the simplest and safest choice.
I want to figure out whether my computer is somehow causing a UDP flood that is originating from my network. So that's my underlying problem, and what follows is simply my non-network-person attempt to hypothesize a solution using python. I'm extrapolating from recipe 13.1 ("Passing Messages with Socket Datagrams") from the python cookbook (also here).
Would it possible/sensible/not insane to try somehow writing an outgoing UDP proxy in python, so that outgoing packets could be logged before being sent on their merry way? If so, how would one go about it? Based on my quick research, perhaps I could start a server process listening on suspect UDP ports and log anything that gets sent, then forward it on, such as:
import socket
s =socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_DGRAM)
s.bind(("", MYPORT))
while True:
packet = dict(zip('data', 'addr'), s.recvfrom(1,024))
log.info("Recieved {data} from {addr}.".format(**packet))
But what about doing this for a large number of ports simultaneously? Impractical? Are there drawbacks or other reasons not to bother with this? Is there a better way to solve this problem (please be gentle).
It might be easier just to install Wireshark, instead of rolling your own in Python.
Basically what I'm trying to achieve is a program which allow users to connect to a each other over a network in, essentially, a chat room. What I'm currently struggling with is writing the code so that the users can connect to each other without knowing the IP-address of the computer that the other users are using or knowing the IP-address of a server.
Does anyone know of a way in which I could simply have all of the users scan the IP range of my network in order to find any active 'room' and then give the user a chance to connect to it?
Also, the hope is that there will be no need for a central server to run this from, rather every user will simply be connected to all other user, essentially being the server and client at the same time.
I can give you two suggestions. First of all, UDP packets to the broadcast address of your network will be received by everybody. Secondly, there is a protocol for programs offering certain services to find each other on a local network. That protocol is called mDNS, ZeroConf, or Bonjour.
Using broadcast UDP is likely going to be the faster route. But if I were you, I'd learn how to use ZeroConf instead. It's supported well under IPv6 and already used by several interesting programs such as SubEthaEdit and Gobby.
Here is a link to a nice tutorial for implementing something that speaks ZeroConf in Python.
Another recommendation... If you want to hand roll your own broadcast/multicast UDP code and you can be sure that all of the systems you're on are running a Linux that's newer than 2003 or so, and all the Windows systems are XP or better, you can probably get away with using IPv6. The IPv6 link-local (think same LAN) all hosts multicast address is ff02::1. That's really simple and easy, and it will reach all the other systems on the same LAN. It's much better than having to figure out what your network's broadcast address is with IPv4.
Sometimes I have to send a message to a specific IP and sometimes I have to broadcast the message to all the IP's in my network. At the other end I have to distinguish between a broadcast and a normal one, but recvfrom() just returns the address the message came from;
there is no difference between them. Can anyone help me distinguish them?
UDP is the protocol.
I don't think it's possible with Python's socket module. UDP is a very minimalistic protocol, and the only way to distinguish between a broadcast and a non-broadcast UDP packet is by looking at the destination address. However, you cannot inspect that part of the packet with the BSD socket API (if I remember it correctly), and the socket module exposes the BSD socket API only. Your best bet would probably be to use the first byte of the message to denote whether it is a broadcast or a unicast message.