Why did TCP-BSD server stuck in read() even data receives? - tcp

I've created a TCP server application using BSD sockets and NUCLEO-H743ZI2 development board with STM32CubeMX 5.6.0 & LwIP 2.0.3 in Keil-MDKARM.
I noticed that:
If a client connects and sends 11 bytes or more at first, server
receives the data correctly and read() responds displaying the data.
However, if client sends the first data lower than 11
bytes, read() function blocks even next received data is higher than 11 bytes, until client disconnects. After the disconnection, all the data queued is displayed.
Namely, if first data sent from a client to my server is lower than 11 bytes, event_callback for a rcvevent is not triggered until disconnection.
My aim is to make the server available to one byte reception.
I've pasted my Server task/thread below. Let me have your kind response at your earliest convenience and feel free to request other related files/libraries(lwip.h, lwipopts.h..).
Kind Regards
void StartTask01(void const * argument)
{
/* USER CODE BEGIN StartTask01 */
MX_LWIP_Init();
/*start a listening tcp server*/
int iServerSocket;
struct sockaddr_in address;
if ((iServerSocket = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0)) < 0)
{
printf("Socket could not be created\n");
}
else
{
address.sin_family = AF_INET;
address.sin_port = htons(80);
address.sin_addr.s_addr = INADDR_ANY;
if (bind(iServerSocket, (struct sockaddr *)&address, sizeof (address)) < 0)
{
printf("socket could not be bound\n");
}
else
{
listen(iServerSocket, MEMP_NUM_NETCONN);
}
}
/*server started listening*/
struct sockaddr_in remoteHost;
int newconn;
char caReadBuffer[1500];
memset(caReadBuffer, 0, 1500);
for(;;)
{
/*block until accepting an incoming connection*/
newconn = accept(iServerSocket, (struct sockaddr *)&remoteHost, (socklen_t *)(sizeof(remoteHost)));
if (newconn != -1)/*if accepted well*/
{
/*block until data arrives*/
read(newconn, caReadBuffer, sizeof(caReadBuffer));
printf("data read: %s\n", caReadBuffer);
memset(caReadBuffer, 0, 1500);
}
}
/* USER CODE END StartTask01 */
}

The problem that's causing this issue is that you only call read once on each connection. If you don't happen to receive all the data from that single call to read (which is entirely unpredictable), you will never call read on that connection again.
When you call read on a blocking TCP connection, it will only block if there is no data available. Otherwise, it will give you whatever data is available up to the maximum number of bytes you ask for. It will not wait for more data if only some is available. It's up to you to call read again if you didn't receive all the data you expected.
One your second iteration of the for loop, you overwrite newconn with a new connection. You don't close the old connection. So you have a socket leak.

SOLVED:
The problem is, my server was listening port 80. I changed it to port 7 and thankfully bug is resolved, now read() works as expected.
This bug let me think that LwIP had problems on listening that web(80) port instead of others. There should be a some kind of discrimination between listening some spectacular ports even for unimplemented protocols.

Related

How to Perform Concurrent Request-Reply for Asynchronous Tasks with ZeroMQ?

Intention
I want to allow a client to send a task to some server at a fixed address.
The server may take that task and perform it at some arbitrary point in the future, but may still take requests from other clients before then.
After performing the task, the server will reply to the client, which may have been running a blocking wait on the reply.
The work and clients come dynamically, so there can't be a fixed initial number.
The work is done in a non-thread-safe context, so workers can't exist on different threads, so all work should take place in a single thread.
Implementation
The following example1 is not a complete implementation of the server, only a compilable section of the sequence that should be able to take place (but is in reality hanging).
Two clients send an integer each, and the server takes one request, then the next request, echo replies to the first request, then echo replies to the second request.
The intention isn't to get the responses ordered, only to allow for the holding of multiple requests simultaneously by the server.
What actually happens here is that the second worker hangs waiting on the request - this is what confuses me, as DEALER sockets should route outgoing messages in a round-robin strategy.
#include <unistd.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <zmq.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
int client(int num)
{
void *context, *client;
int buf[1];
context = zmq_ctx_new();
client = zmq_socket(context, ZMQ_REQ);
zmq_connect(client, "tcp://localhost:5559");
*buf = num;
zmq_send(client, buf, 1, 0);
*buf = 0;
zmq_recv(client, buf, 1, 0);
printf("client %d receiving: %d\n", num, *buf);
zmq_close(client);
zmq_ctx_destroy(context);
return 0;
}
void multipart_proxy(void *from, void *to)
{
zmq_msg_t message;
while (1) {
zmq_msg_init(&message);
zmq_msg_recv(&message, from, 0);
int more = zmq_msg_more(&message);
zmq_msg_send(&message, to, more ? ZMQ_SNDMORE : 0);
zmq_msg_close(&message);
if (!more) break;
}
}
int main(void)
{
int status;
if (fork() == 0) {
client(1);
return(0);
}
if (fork() == 0) {
client(2);
return 0;
}
/* SERVER */
void *context, *frontend, *backend, *worker1, *worker2;
int wbuf1[1], wbuf2[1];
context = zmq_ctx_new();
frontend = zmq_socket(context, ZMQ_ROUTER);
backend = zmq_socket(context, ZMQ_DEALER);
zmq_bind(frontend, "tcp://*:5559");
zmq_bind(backend, "inproc://workers");
worker1 = zmq_socket(context, ZMQ_REP);
zmq_connect(worker1, "inproc://workers");
multipart_proxy(frontend, backend);
*wbuf1 = 0;
zmq_recv(worker1, wbuf1, 1, 0);
printf("worker1 receiving: %d\n", *wbuf1);
worker2 = zmq_socket(context, ZMQ_REP);
zmq_connect(worker2, "inproc://workers");
multipart_proxy(frontend, backend);
*wbuf2 = 0;
zmq_recv(worker2, wbuf2, 1, 0);
printf("worker2 receiving: %d\n", *wbuf2);
zmq_send(worker1, wbuf1, 1, 0);
multipart_proxy(backend, frontend);
zmq_send(worker2, wbuf2, 1, 0);
multipart_proxy(backend, frontend);
wait(&status);
zmq_close(frontend);
zmq_close(backend);
zmq_close(worker1);
zmq_close(worker2);
zmq_ctx_destroy(context);
return 0;
}
Other Options
I have looked at CLIENT and SERVER sockets and they appear to be capable on paper, however in practice they're sufficiently new that the system version of ZeroMQ that I have doesn't yet support them.
If it is not possible to perform this in ZeroMQ, any alternative suggestions are very welcome.
1 Based on the Shared Queue section of the ZeroMQ guide.
Let me share a view on how ZeroMQ could meet the above defined Intention.
Let's rather use ZeroMQ Scalable Formal Communication Pattern Archetypes ( as they are RTO now, not as we may wish them to be at some, yet unsure, point in (a just potentially happening) future evolution state ).
We need not hesitate to use many more ZeroMQ-based connections among a herd of coming/leaving client-instance(s) and the server
For example :
Client .connect()-s a REQ-socket to Server-address:port-A to ask for a "job"-ticket processing over this connection
Client .connect()-s a SUB-socket to Server-address:port-B to listen ( if present ) about published announcements about already completed "job"-tickets that are Server-ready to deliver results for
Client exposes another REQ-socket to request upon an already broadcast "job"-ticket completion announcement message, it has just heard about over the SUB-socket, to get "job"-ticket results finally delivered, if proving itself, by providing a proper / matching job-ticket-AUTH-key to proof its right to receive the publicly announced results' availability, using this same socket to deliver a POSACK-message to Server upon client has correctly received this "job"-ticket results "in hands"
Server exposes REP-socket to respond each client ad-hoc upon a "job"-ticket request, notifying this way about having "accepted"-job-ticket, delivering also a job-ticket-AUTH-key for later pickup of results
Server exposes PUB-socket to announce any and all not yet picked-up "finished"-job-tickets
Server exposes another REP-socket to receive any possible attempt to request to deliver "job"-ticket-results. Upon verifying there delivered job-ticket-AUTH-key, Server decides whether the respective REQ-message had matching job-ticket-AUTH-key to indeed deliver a proper message with results, or whether a match did not happen, in which case a message will carry some other payload data ( logic is left for further thoughts, so as to prevent potential bruteforcing or eavesdropping and similar, less primitive attacks on stealing the results )
Clients need not stay waiting for results live/online and/or can survive certain amounts of LoS, L2/L3-errors or network-storm stresses
Clients need just to keep some kind of job-ticket-ID and job-ticket-AUTH-key for later retrieving of the Server-processes/maintained/auth-ed results
Server will keep listening for new jobs
Server will accept new job-tickets with providing a privately added job-ticket-AUTH-key
Server will process job-tickets as it will to do so
Server will maintain a circular-buffer of completed job-tickets to be announced
Server will announce, in due time and repeated as decided in public, job-tickets, that are ready for client-initiated retrieval
Server will accept new retrieval requests
Server will verify client-requests for matching any announced job-ticket-ID and testing if job-ticket-AUTH-key match either
Server will respond to either matching / non-matching job-ticket-ID results retrieval request(s)
Server will remove a job-ticket-ID from a circular-buffer only upon both POSACK-ed AUTH-match before a retrieval and a POSACK-message re-confirmed delivery to client

dev_queue_xmit randomly returns NET_XMIT_CN with tun/tap device

I have a userspace program which construct its own packet (App, UDP, IP) and write()s it to the TUN device. The packet is intercepted by my own Netfilter module, which it checks if the packet it received is one which we want to process. Then my Netfilter module will skb_clone() the original skb and create a response packet which I fill in with some data to be returned to the user-space program. To send the response, I use dev_queue_xmit(). It randomly returns NET_XMIT_CN even though I just created a fresh TUN device and there is no other traffic passing through. If I keep executing the user-space program (sending new packets to the TUN device), eventually the TUN device will respond, but not consistently. I can't seem to track down why it is behaving so erratically.
Essentially I am using the TUN device as a mechanism to communicate from user-space to kernel-space, and vice versa.
Here's my user-space app:
tun_fd = tun_alloc(dev_name);
packet = ... /* Construct request...*/
nwrite = write(tun_fd, packet, packet_len);
...
unsigned recv_buf[1500];
int received = 0;
while (!received) {
nread = read(tun_fd, recv_buf, 1500);
...
}
...
close(tun_fd);
Here's my Netfilter module:
static struct nf_hook_ops nfho;
static int __init my_hook(void)
{
nfho.hook = hook_func;
nfho.hooknum = 0;
nfho.hook = PF_INET;
nfho.hook = NF_IP_PRI_FIRST;
nf_register_hook(&nfho);
}
unsigned int hook_func(void *priv, struct sk_buff *skb, const struct nf_hook_state *state)
{
struct sk_buff *clone_skb = skb_clone(skb, GFP_KERNEL):
...
/*
* Check if packet is for us.
* Check IP & UDP header, etc
* If so, parse request, put together response clone_skb
*/
...
if ((err = dev_queue_xmit(clone_skb)) != 0) {
printk(....)
/* Either it return 0 (success) or 2, meaning NET_XMIT_CN */
}
return NF_STOLEN;
}
I can't seem to figure out this behavior. Am I misusing the TUN device? Is there an easier way than this?
Please let me know if I should provide any extra details or clarify something.

QT socket does no read all data

I want to read the data through socket in Qt. I am using QBytearray to store the data. Actually server sends 4095 bytes in a single stretch, but in the QT client side I am receiving in different chunks because of my application design.
void Dialog::on_pushButton_clicked()
{
socket=new QTcpSocket(this);
socket->connectToHost("172.17.0.1",5000);
if(socket->waitForConnected(-1))
qDebug()<<"Connected";
Read_data();
}
void Dialog::Read_data()
{
QString filename(QString("%1/%2.bin").arg(path,device));
qDebug()<<"filename"<<filename;
QFile fileobj(filename);
int cmd,file_size,percentage_completed;
if(!fileobj.open(QFile::WriteOnly | QFile::Text))
{
qDebug()<<"Cannot open file for writting";
return;
}
QTextStream out(&fileobj);
while(1)
{
socket->waitForReadyRead(-1);
byteArray=socket->read(4);
qDebug()<<"size of bytearray"<<byteArray.size();
length=0xffff & ((byteArray[3]<<8)|(0x00ff & byteArray[2]));
int rem;
byteArray=socket->read(length);
while(byteArray.size()!=length)
{
rem=length-byteArray.size();
byteArray.append( socket->read(rem));
}
fileobj.write(byteArray);
fileobj.flush();
byteArray.clear();
}
}
server code:
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
#include<fcntl.h>
#include<sys/ioctl.h>
#include<mtd/mtd-user.h>
#include <sys/socket.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <netinet/in.h>
#include <netdb.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <arpa/inet.h>
#include<math.h>
#include <netinet/tcp.h>
static int msb,lsb,size,listenfd = 0, connfd = 0,len;
main()
{
struct sockaddr_in serv_addr;
serverlen=sizeof(serv_addr);
listenfd = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
memset(&serv_addr, '0', sizeof(serv_addr));
serv_addr.sin_family = AF_INET;
serv_addr.sin_addr.s_addr = htonl(INADDR_ANY);
serv_addr.sin_port = htons(5000);
if(bind(listenfd,(struct sockaddr*)&serv_addr, sizeof(serv_addr))<0)
{
perror("\n Error in binding");
exit(1);
}
size=100000;
listen(listenfd, 1);
fd=fopen(new.bin,"r");
len=4089;
while(1)
{
buff[0]=25;
buff[1]=2;
buff[2]=60;
buff[3]=47;
n=fread(buff+4,1,length, fd);
buff[len+4]=5;
buff[len+5]='\n';
if(n>0)
sent_bytes=send(connfd,buff,n+6,0);
size =size-len;
if(size==0)
break;
}
}
If I execute the code in localhost(127.0.0.1) I can receive the data fully. The problem arises only when I connect to different host IP. Kindly help me in this regard
EDIT 1:
The problem is when bytesAvailable() returns the maximum bytes I am waiting for waitForReadyRead() times out. It works fine if the bytesAvailable() is less than as expected. Does bytesAvailable() allocate any buffer annoyed by this behaviour.
while(1)
{
while(socket->bytesAvailable()<4)
{
if (!socket->waitForReadyRead())
{
qDebug() << "waitForReadyRead() timed out";
return;
}
}
byteArray=socket->read(4);
length=0xffff & ((byteArray[3]<<8)|(0x00ff & byteArray[2]));
int rem_bytes=length+2;
qDebug()<<"bytes available"<<socket->bytesAvailable();
while(socket->bytesAvailable()<=rem_bytes)
{
qDebug()<<"reading";
if (!socket->waitForReadyRead(10000))//times out here if bytesAvailable() == rem_bytes but executes well in other cases
{
qDebug() << "waitForReadyRead() timed out";
return;
}
qDebug()<<"ready";
byteArray.append(socket->read(rem_bytes));
qDebug()<<"size of bytearray"<<byteArray.size();
if(byteArray.size()==length+2)
{
for(int j=0;j<length;j++)
newarray.append(byteArray[j]);
fileobj.write(newarray);
fileobj.flush();
newarray.clear();
byteArray.clear();
break;
}
else
{
rem_bytes -=byteArray.size();
}
}
Send();
}
I have tried by sending different data sizes cannot figure it out why?. Please provide me a solution pointing where I have gone wrong
Your problem stems from your misunderstanding of how TCP works.
When data is transmitted from a sender, it is broken into packets and then each packet is transmitted one by one until all the data has finished sending. If packets go missing, they are re-transmitted until either they reach their destination, or a timeout is reached.
As an added complication, each packet might follow various routes before arriving at the destination. The receiver has the task of acknowledging to the sender that packets have been received and then making sure that the packets are joined back together in the correct order.
For this reason, the longer the network route, the greater the chance of getting a delay in getting the data re-assembled. This is what you've been experiencing with your localhost versus networked-computer tests.
The IP stack on your computer does not wait for the complete data to arrive before passing it to your application but it will pause if it's missing a packet in sequence.
e.g. If you have 10 packets and packet 4 arrives last, the IP stack will pass the data to your application in two sets: 1-2-3, [[wait for 4 to arrive]], 4-5-6-7-8-9-10.
For this reason, when waitForReadyRead() returns true, you cannot expect that all your data has arrived, you must always check how many bytes have been actually received.
There are two places in your code where you wait for data. The first thing you wait for is a four-byte number to tell you how much data has been sent. Even though it's highly likely that you will have received all four bytes, it's good practice to check.
while(socket.bytesAvailable() < 4){
if (!socket.waitForReadyRead()) { // timeout after 30 second, by default
qDebug() << "waitForReadyRead() timed out";
return;
}
}
byteArray=socket->read(4);
qDebug()<<"size of bytearray"<<byteArray.size();
length=0xffff & ((byteArray[3]<<8)|(0x00ff & byteArray[2]));
The next thing you need to do is keep cycling through a wait-read-wait-read loop until all your data has arrived, each time keeping track of how many bytes you still expect to receive.
int bytesRemaining = length;
while(socket->bytesAvailable() < bytesRemaining){
if (!socket->waitForReadyRead()){
qDebug() "waitForReadyRead() timed out";
return;
}
// calling read() with the bytesRemaining argument will not guarantee
// that you will receive all the data. It only means that you will
// receive AT MOST bytesRemaining bytes.
byteArray = socket->read(bytesRemaining);
bytesRemaining -= byteArray.size();
fileobj.write(byteArray);
fileobj.flush();
}
All this said, you should not use the blocking API in your main thread or your GUI could freeze up. I suggest either using the asynchronous API, or create a worker thread to handle the downloading (and use the blocking API in the worker thread).
To see examples of how to use the two different APIs, looking in the documentation for the Fortune Client Example and the Blocking Fortune Client Example.
EDIT:
My apologies, there's a bug in the code above that doesn't take an number of possibilities into account, most importantly, if all data has already been received, and the end game once all data has finally arrived.
The following one-line change should clear that up:
Change
while(socket->bytesAvailable() < bytesRemaining){
To
while (bytesRemaining > 0) {
So you are saying that waitForReadyRead() returns false regardless of the time given once your the buffer has all 3000 expected bytes. What other behavior would you want? Perhaps you need rethink the trigger logic here. Many TCP/IP app protocols have some sort of frame start detection logic they combine with the required message size to then trigger processing. This lets them cope with widely different package sizes that the intermediate networks will impose, as well as truncated/partial messages. Once you have it working, connect to it by way of your cell phone and you will get different set of packet fragmentation examples to test with.

How can I send a simple HTTP request with a lwIP stack?

Please move/close this if the question isn't relevant.
Core: Cortex-M4
Microprocessor: TI TM4C1294NCPDT.
IP Stack: lwIP 1.4.1
I am using this microprocessor to do some data logging, and I want to send some information to a separate web server via a HTTP request in the form of:
http://123.456.789.012:8800/process.php?data1=foo&data2=bar&time=1234568789
and I want the processor to be able to see the response header (i.e if it was 200 OK or something went wrong) - it does not have to do display/recieve the actual content.
lwIP has a http server for the microprocessor, but I'm after the opposite (microprocessor is the client).
I am not sure how packets correlate to request/response headers, so I'm not sure how I'm meant to actually send/recieve information.
This ended up being pretty simple to implement, forgot to update this question.
I pretty much followed the instructions given on this site, which is the Raw/TCP 'documentation'.
Basically, The HTTP request is encoded in TCP packets, so to send data to my PHP server, I sent an HTTP request using TCP packets (lwIP does all the work).
The HTTP packet I want to send looks like this:
HEAD /process.php?data1=12&data2=5 HTTP/1.0
Host: mywebsite.com
To "translate" this to text which is understood by an HTTP server, you have to add "\r\n" carriage return/newline in your code. So it looks like this:
char *string = "HEAD /process.php?data1=12&data2=5 HTTP/1.0\r\nHost: mywebsite.com\r\n\r\n ";
Note that the end has two lots of "\r\n"
You can use GET or HEAD, but because I didn't care about HTML site my PHP server returned, I used HEAD (it returns a 200 OK on success, or a different code on failure).
The lwIP raw/tcp works on callbacks. You basically set up all the callback functions, then push the data you want to a TCP buffer (in this case, the TCP string specified above), and then you tell lwIP to send the packet.
Function to set up a TCP connection (this function is directly called by my application every time I want to send a TCP packet):
void tcp_setup(void)
{
uint32_t data = 0xdeadbeef;
/* create an ip */
struct ip_addr ip;
IP4_ADDR(&ip, 110,777,888,999); //IP of my PHP server
/* create the control block */
testpcb = tcp_new(); //testpcb is a global struct tcp_pcb
// as defined by lwIP
/* dummy data to pass to callbacks*/
tcp_arg(testpcb, &data);
/* register callbacks with the pcb */
tcp_err(testpcb, tcpErrorHandler);
tcp_recv(testpcb, tcpRecvCallback);
tcp_sent(testpcb, tcpSendCallback);
/* now connect */
tcp_connect(testpcb, &ip, 80, connectCallback);
}
Once a connection to my PHP server is established, the 'connectCallback' function is called by lwIP:
/* connection established callback, err is unused and only return 0 */
err_t connectCallback(void *arg, struct tcp_pcb *tpcb, err_t err)
{
UARTprintf("Connection Established.\n");
UARTprintf("Now sending a packet\n");
tcp_send_packet();
return 0;
}
This function calls the actual function tcp_send_packet() which sends the HTTP request, as follows:
uint32_t tcp_send_packet(void)
{
char *string = "HEAD /process.php?data1=12&data2=5 HTTP/1.0\r\nHost: mywebsite.com\r\n\r\n ";
uint32_t len = strlen(string);
/* push to buffer */
error = tcp_write(testpcb, string, strlen(string), TCP_WRITE_FLAG_COPY);
if (error) {
UARTprintf("ERROR: Code: %d (tcp_send_packet :: tcp_write)\n", error);
return 1;
}
/* now send */
error = tcp_output(testpcb);
if (error) {
UARTprintf("ERROR: Code: %d (tcp_send_packet :: tcp_output)\n", error);
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
Once the TCP packet has been sent (this is all need if you want to "hope for the best" and don't care if the data actually sent), the PHP server return a TCP packet (with a 200 OK, etc. and the HTML code if you used GET instead of HEAD). This code can be read and verified in the following code:
err_t tcpRecvCallback(void *arg, struct tcp_pcb *tpcb, struct pbuf *p, err_t err)
{
UARTprintf("Data recieved.\n");
if (p == NULL) {
UARTprintf("The remote host closed the connection.\n");
UARTprintf("Now I'm closing the connection.\n");
tcp_close_con();
return ERR_ABRT;
} else {
UARTprintf("Number of pbufs %d\n", pbuf_clen(p));
UARTprintf("Contents of pbuf %s\n", (char *)p->payload);
}
return 0;
}
p->payload contains the actual "200 OK", etc. information. Hopefully this helps someone.
I have left out some error checking in my code above to simplify the answer.
Take a look at the HTTP example in Wikipedia. The client will send the GET and HOST lines. The server will respond with many lines for a response. The first line will have the response code.
I managed to create an HTTP client for raspberry pi Pico W using the example here.
It uses the httpc_get_file or httpc_get_file_dns functions from the sdk.
However, that example is incomplete since it has a memory leak.
You will need to free the memory taken by the struct pbuf *hdr in the headers function and struct pbuf *p in the body function with respectively pbuf_free(hdr); and pbuf_free(p);
Without those modifications, it will stop working after about 20 calls (probably depends on the size of the response).

TCP sockets over wlan

I have a project that uses TCP sockets to communicate between a server and one client. As of now I have been doing this on one computer so I have just used local address of "127.0.0.1" for the address to bind and connect to on both sides and its worked fine. Now I have a second computer to act as a client, but I don't know how to change the addresses accordingly. They are connected through a network that is not connected to the Internet. Before the code looked like this -
Server -
struct addrinfo hints;
struct addrinfo *servinfo; //will point to the results
//store the connecting address and size
struct sockaddr_storage their_addr;
socklen_t their_addr_size;
memset(&hints, 0, sizeof hints); //make sure the struct is empty
hints.ai_family = AF_INET; //local address
hints.ai_socktype = SOCK_STREAM; //tcp
hints.ai_flags = AI_PASSIVE; //use local-host address
//get server info, put into servinfo
if ((status = getaddrinfo("127.0.0.1", port, &hints, &servinfo)) != 0) {
fprintf(stderr, "getaddrinfo error: %s\n", gai_strerror(status));
return false;
}
//make socket
fd = socket(servinfo->ai_family, servinfo->ai_socktype, servinfo->ai_protocol);
if (fd < 0) {
printf("\nserver socket failure %m", errno);
return false;
}
//allow reuse of port
int yes=1;
if (setsockopt(fd,SOL_SOCKET,SO_REUSEADDR,(char*) &yes,sizeof(int)) == -1) {
perror("setsockopt");
return false;
}
//unlink and bind
unlink("127.0.0.1");
if(bind (fd, servinfo->ai_addr, servinfo->ai_addrlen) < 0) {
printf("\nBind error %m", errno);
return false;
}
Client -
struct addrinfo hints;
struct addrinfo *servinfo; //will point to the results
memset(&hints, 0, sizeof hints); //make sure the struct is empty
hints.ai_family = AF_INET; //local address
hints.ai_socktype = SOCK_STREAM; //tcp
hints.ai_flags = AI_PASSIVE; //use local-host address
//get server info, put into servinfo
if ((status = getaddrinfo("127.0.0.1", port, &hints, &servinfo)) != 0) {
fprintf(stderr, "getaddrinfo error: %s\n", gai_strerror(status));
return false;
}
//make socket
fd = socket(servinfo->ai_family, servinfo->ai_socktype, servinfo->ai_protocol);
if (fd < 0) {
printf("\nserver socket failure %m", errno);
return false;
}
//connect
if(connect(fd, servinfo->ai_addr, servinfo->ai_addrlen) < 0) {
printf("\nclient connection failure %m", errno);
return false;
}
I know it should be simple, but I can't figure out how to change the IPs to get them to work. I tried setting the server computer's IP address in the quotes in these lines -
if ((status = getaddrinfo("127.0.0.1", port, &hints, &servinfo)) != 0)
and
unlink("127.0.0.1");
and then change the address in the client code to the client computer's IP address in this line -
if ((status = getaddrinfo("127.0.0.1", port, &hints, &servinfo)) != 0)
Whenever I do that, it tells me connection refused. I have also tried doing the opposite way of putting the server's address in the client's line and client's address in the server's lines along with a few other attempts. At this point I feel like I am just guessing though. So can someone please help me understand how to change this from using the local address with one computer to connecting two computers? Any help is appreciated.
First, unlink("127.0.0.1"); is totally wrong here, don't do that.
Then, you have two computers connected by some network. Both should have IP addresses. Replace 127.0.0.1 with the server's IP address in both client and the server. The server does not to have to know client's address beforehand - it'll get that information from the accept(2) call. The client needs server's address to know where to connect. The server needs its own address for the bind(2) call.
The main problem is that your putting AI_PASSIVE in your client code. AI_PASSIVE is meant for servers only (that's what it signals).
Also on the server side you should first of all not call unlink. That's for AF_UNIX sockets only, not AF_INET. Secondly you don't need to put "127.0.0.1" in the getaddrinfo line on the server side. It's better to use NULL to bind to all available addresses.
If you change those things, I believe your code should work. However you're actually supposed to loop on the getaddrinfo result using the ai_next pointer and try to connect to each result, using the first that succeeds.
Connection Refused usually means your client received a RST to his SYN. This is most often caused by the lack of a listening socket on the server, on the port you're trying to connect to.
Run your server
On the CLI, type netstat -ant. Do you see an entry that's in LISTEN state on your port?
Something like:
tcp4 0 0 *.3689 *.* LISTEN
I bet you do not, and therefore have a problem with your server listening socket. I also bet the changes you made this this line:
if ((status = getaddrinfo("127.0.0.1", port, &hints, &servinfo)) != 0) {
Weren't quite right. Try changing that IP to 0.0.0.0 on the server to tell it to to bind to any IP on the system. On the client, that line should have the IP address of the server. You should also remove the unlink() call in the server; unnecessary.
If you do have a listening socket, then there's probably a firewall or something in between your boxes that's blocking the SYN. Try typing service iptables stop on the CLI of both systems.

Resources