i need my client app to be able to sendto() and recvfrom() through the same port using UDP.
I have discovered i can only bind one socket to the port and it's better to do it when using recvfrom(), otherwise things mess up.
I want to be able to still send UDP packets through that port but binding it to a different socket is a problem as i mentioned above.
What can i do ?
thanks.
This should work fine. One socket bound to a port where you use recvfrom() and sendto() on the same socket. See this example from MSDN that shows recvfrom() in isolation - right around the recvfrom() you should be able to sendto() using that same socket.
Related
i wrote a multithreaded UDP server after the following scheme:
Scheme:
1 Receiver Thread
(Multiple Worker Threads, each has an own Socket, not bindend ,just created Ipv4, UDP,Datagram)
Message gets pushed to 1 worker which then proceed's it and then sends an answere with its own socket.
Problem:
This works perfectly on all my own test programs but for some odd reason it doesnt work with an old software for what i am emulating the server. The software uses async Wsa (overlapped), but i still doesn't get why it doesnt work.
Confusion:
It works if I use the same socket for sending as i used for receiving the data on the serverside. I dont get why, udp is a connectionless protocol so how can it detect a different socket?
Confusion: It works if I use the same socket for sending as i used for
receiving the data on the serverside. I dont get why, udp is a
connectionless protocol so how can it detect a different socket?
If you look in the UDP headers of the packets you are sending you will notice that they contain a "UDP Source Port" field. That field can be examined by the receiver of the packet (via recvfrom()) to find out which UDP port the sending UDP socket used on the sending machine (note that this is different from the "UDP Destination Port" field that determines which port the packet should be delivered to on the receiving machine). It's possible that in your case, the program you are communicating with is looking at that field and adjusting its behavior based on that field's value.
If you're wondering what that field will be set to if you never called bind() on the sending UDP socket, the answer is that the OS will choose an available UDP port number to send from (essentially an implicit bind()).
When I do the following steps to receive a message and send a reply, it fails.
I am using TCP. I need the program to send data from the same port it received from.
bind()
listen()
accept()
recv()
connect()//it fails to connect here using the same socket.<br>
send()
It seems you have a problem in understanding the way tcp works. There is a server and a client. The server waits for connections, and the client makes connections. Once a connection is established, the server and the client can communicate bi-directional (i.e. both can send and recive messages). Of course, their role might change, but this is the way it works. So, the server does:
bind()
listen()
accept()
recv()
send()
It is stuck at accept() until a client performs connect() on the port that the server is listening to.
As my explanation is pretty brief, I suggest you read this tutorial about linux sockets.
I have 2 UDP sockets (SOCKET), one for sending and one for receiving on a Windows machine. They both work well, but the trouble is that a program that is receiving messages from my send socket replies to the same port which sent the message.
I know that if I don't bind the send socket, using sendto will pick an ephemeral port to send on.
I'd like to know if it is possible to any of the following, and if so, what is the recommended way to do it:
Bind both the send and receive sockets to a chosen port so that when the external program sends a message back it can be received.
Update the port to which the receive socket is bound in such a way as to receive on the port from which I last sent a message (not sure if this would create a race condition).
Some other correct method.
So far I have tried:
Not binding the send socket (it sends from some open port to the destination port). I can successfully receive messages on that port for as long as it doesn't change, but eventually it does change.
Binding both the send and receive sockets to a desired port. This creates the desired behaviour when I watch the packets using a sniffer, but the receive socket never receives the messages even though I see them being transmitted to the correct port and IP.
Packets are being received from more than one outside entity, and not guaranteed to be in any particular order.
Thank you in advance!
Looks like you are trying to use threads to separate sending and receiving data. I would question this approach, since UDP is so easy to handle in one thread. Nevertheless, you can just use the same socket from both threads if you want (see related question: Are parallel calls to send/recv on the same socket valid?). Just bind(2) it and, optionally, connect(2) it.
For my Uni assignment I have to create a fast action paced networked game and so have chosen to use UDP as opposed to TCP. I am aware of a lot of the differences in programming both UDP and TCP and have read through most of the relevant parts of MSDN's documentation on winsock. On MSDN it states that creating a UDP socket via the connect() function should bind the socket to the address and port specified and as a result be able use the send() and recv() functions with the created socket.
For my application I create a client and use connect() using the loopback address which sends a number of packets via the send() function. The client, after calling select(), then receives the packets it sent out. However the result I get from the recv() function is SOCKET_ERROR and the error description using WSAGetLastError() is "An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host".
If i use the bind() function and use sendto() to send data over the loopback address, I recv() packets without any errors... Does anyone know why the connect() function is not doing what it is supposed to do, and has anyone been able to use UDP sockets with the connect() function?
You will need to call bind() if you want your program to receive UDP packets. connect() only sets the address that the socket will send packets to if you call send(); it does not associate the socket with a local UDP port to receive on; for that you must call bind().
"UNIX Network Programming" points out that a connect call made on a UDP client side socket figures out and stores all the state about the destination socket address in advance (masking, selecting interface, etc.), saving the cost of doing so on every ::sendto call. This book claims that ::send vs ::sendto can be up to 3x faster because of this reduced overhead - data can go straight to the NIC driver bypassing most IP stack processing. High performance game programmer's may want to consider this.
you should check Beej's Guide to Network Programming Using Internet Sockets, there are nice examples that address your question.
Keep in mind that the UDP protocol is a "connectionless" protocol meaning that you never ever connect to the host, you just send out data. So you can see that connect as an action is meaningless for UDP.
For UDP you should use sendto() and recvfrom() in these function you specify the address and the buffers and that's about it, everything else that is comfortably handled for you in TCP is gone you have to handle things on your own.
In the MSDN documentation its mentioned that you can in fact somehow use the normal send/recv functions with UDP but why would you when you have separate functions already? Like other commented already connect() for UDP does something else it's not essentially a "connect" operation but a sort of a filter to set up send()/recv() for UDP usage.
I am writing simple client-server program.
Client send some messages to server using UDP or TCP. Server must be able to support both UDP and TCP.
If client, sends message using UDP, sequence of method calls in client is socket(),bind(),sendto(),recvfrom(),close() and that in server is socket(),bind(),sendto(),recvfrom(),close().
If it uses TCP,
sequence of call in server is
socket(),bind(),listen(),accept(),send(),recv(),close().
and that in client is
socket(),bind(),connect(),send(),recv(),close()
In my program, user/client is given choice in the start to select what he want to use UDP or TCP. So, my main problem is how can I know or differentiate in the server side, if the client is sending message using TCP or UDP. If it uses TCP, I must call listen(),accept(),send(),recv()
and if it uses UDP, I don't call listen(),accept() but call sendto() and recvfrom().
So, how can I differentiate/know this in the beginning so that I can make appropriate function calls.
Thanks.
Before the packet reaches you, you don't know whether it's UDP or TCP.
So you want to bind to both UDP and TCP sockets if you expect requests both ways.
Once you did, you just know which way it came by the socket you received the packet through.
When you create the socket, you pass a type - SOCK_STREAM (TCP) or SOCK_DGRAM (UDP)
So the two kinds of traffic will be on two different sockets.
Just as Henry Troup pointed out, an IP socket is defined as
(transport, interface, port).
(UDP, 127.0.0.1, 80) is not the same IP socket as (TCP, 127.0.0.1, 80) , thus you can safely bind to both of them and listen for incoming traffic.
just let the TCP socket listen on port X, and do the UDP connections through port Y