Would a custom IP-based protocol work? [closed] - ip

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
Let's say somebody invented a new protocol I would put on top of IP. Would two computers from the other ends of the world be able to communicate with it, i.e. would routers forward the frames that aren't standard TCP/UDP/ICMP?

Yes, if it is build on top of IP then it would be routable over the internet. The IP protocol defines the header and payload. The header is used for routing. So you would be able to send custom IP-based protocol data from one computer to another over the internet.
However, both computers will need custom drivers to send, receive and understand the data.
I'm not sure why you'd bother though. If you're sending custom data, you're much better off writing an application level protocol on top of tcp or udp and take advantage of the networking layer built into all computers and operating systems already. It'll be easier to write, maintain, and debug.

Related

iPV 6 changes frequently for sip signalling [closed]

Closed. This question is not about programming or software development. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed yesterday.
Improve this question
We have been using Linphone for our calling services and its working fine on wifi and almost every cellular network except the one with iPV6 infrastructure.
The problem we discovered with iPV6 environment is that our signalling ip changes very frequently and as a result our call drops after 30 seconds timeout.
Any guide regarding this matter will be helpful.
Thats happens often on 5G network.
You can do nothing here, it is not related to asterisk, it is related to how 5G providers handle NAT. The do not care.
Only thing you can do is use android/apple push mechanism to force your application to re-register with new IP.
You can do nothing if customer change GSM cells while in call. Except maybe issue re-invite, but that is really hard and I know no softphone which do that correctly.
Another option is to use tunnel with ping inside it/resetup(or setup ignore source IP for tunnel) and put your sip traffic inside tunnel. But that WILL eat battery a lot and customer will complain or uninstall your app.

Implication of lack of default gateway [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I am studying networking and operating systems and I stumbled upon this statement:
If there is no default gateway in the routing table we can't transfer packets to all the addresses.
I am asking whether the above statement is correct?
Yes the statement is true. Here is the definition from wikipedia
A default gateway in computer networking is the node that is assumed
to know how to forward packets on to other networks. Typically, in a
TCP/IP network, nodes such as servers, workstations and network
devices each have a defined default route setting, (pointing to the
default gateway), defining where to send packets for IP addresses for
which they can determine no specific route.
A routing table can not store information of all the possible routes to which the computer may connect. So it needs a default mechanism to send traffic to computers for which no known path exists. The way is to route all such packets to default gateway.

Qustion about load balancers [closed]

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm using a lot of load balancers in my workplace and I was wondering if there is a good open source one?
By good I mean one that can be used in an enterprise, and also is it efficient to use that software with regular PC?
BTW, I've been searching the internet a lot and found a few but not sure which one is better than the other one, I need your expertise.
HAProxy and nginx are popular open source options:
http://haproxy.1wt.eu/
http://www.nginx.com/
I recommend reading through the documentation for each one to get a sense of the capabilities. HAProxy is more analogous to the network load balancers I suspect you're using at work, with full support for any application protocol layered over TCP. Nginx is really an HTTP server, but it can be configured as a reverse proxy that load balances to back-end destination servers. If you just need to load-balance HTTP traffic (and you don't need to route other network protocols like ssh or SMTP), then nginx can be a good fit.

Is there any protocol for reverse traceroute? [closed]

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
Say i'm communicating with a computer A in a remote network .
Is it possible to know what are the hops that he is going through?
In other word, is it possible to detect what is computer A route to my computer?
I know that A might have a various routes to my computer , it just want to find a route. My whole problem begins with that fact that some networks "hides" there inside computer ( like NAT ) and just give you the gateway ip.
(I'm not talking about my route to his computer that can be easly achived by traceroute)
thanks!
The IP option Record Route asks routers along the way to include their address in the datagram so the route can be tracked. The trick is, many routers and firewalls are not keen on giving out this information and DROP packets with this option set. And, you'd have to get the remote peer to set the flag, so it would only be useful if you're in control of the software on the remote peer too.

Doubling Internet Connection Speed [closed]

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 12 years ago.
Improve this question
Scenario: I have two ADSL modem that are connected to to different ISPs. Each has 256KBps Speed.
Question:Is it possible to have 512KBps speed?(I have one PC that can be host any OS)
Is any special appliance essential for doing that?
Thanks in Advance,
Ashkan.
This is called multihoming or load-balancing.
The simplest way to do this would be to buy a router with two WAN ports that supports load balancing. These are generally expensive.
Alternatively you can set up a computer with 3 network interfaces to do the routing for you.
Windows
Using regedit navigate to
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\services\NetBT\Parameters
Create 32-bit dword value "RandomAdapter" with a value of 1
You will need to set the "metric" value of the different adapters if you find traffic is still favouring one connection over the other.
From my answer on serverfault, the
"route" command is used to set this metric. The basic syntax is;
route ADD <destination> <subnet mask> <gateway (vpn dhcp server)> <metrix> IF <interface number> -p
There's some tutorials floating around here and there.
Linux
See the answers on serverfault
RJFalconer is right, but you should know that if you do this, no single TCP connection will be able to get more than 256kBps. It's much like SMP in that manner.
You may also run into trouble with (web) applications and protocols that assume every user has a single IP address at any one time. If you can replace the two connections with a single faster one, that would be vastly preferable.

Resources