I have a Win11 laptop and I installed Yabe and was easily able to explore bacnet objects on my home thermostat. I'm trying to duplicate this on a Linux Laptop. My issue is that Yabe is not finding my thermostat on the Linux machine.
I'm running Linux Mint 21 Cinnamon 5.4.12. I installed Mono and downloaded Yabe. I am running with command "mono ./Yabe.exe". The Win11 laptop rules out thermostat setup/network issues. In the Yabe log window I get a message that says "error loading plugins". I did't try to install any plugins so I don't know where this is coming from and I'm not sure if it's even the root cause. Initially I just left the Yabe folder in my downloads folder. I also moved it to /usr/bin but that didn't solve anything. Any suggestions would be appreciated. I would really like not to have to use Win11 as it is a memory hog.
A similar question was raised on sourceforge but the answers have not helped me.
https://sourceforge.net/p/yetanotherbacnetexplorer/discussion/general/thread/1e78874922/?limit=25
Thank you for the suggestions. I ran Wireshark capture with filter "udp and port 47808" and received i-Am 100001 from the thermostat at 192.168.0.150 which is the static address I assigned. Like I said, since I literally have a Win-11 laptop sitting beside this one with Yabe installed and it sees the thermostat just fine, that rules out most network router issues. Also, I currently have the Linux firewall turned off. I believe it must be some bug with the Yabe installation on this version of Linux. I keep wanting to get away from Windows and rely solely on Linux and then I run into issues like this that make me realize why it's not universally adapted in industry.
At least for Windows, I believe that the plug-in DLLs are not strictly necessary/important; and you could drop the relevant plug-in DLLs alongside the 'YABE.exe' binary (- within the same folder); I've included a picture of plug-in DLLs' filenames.
Is both the (BACnet) client machine and server/thermostat machine using a public IP address, or at least a private IP address within the same subnet/network address range?
Have you got a Linux (and/or Windows) firewall blocking communication?
Can you see the 47808 port # open using the 'NMap' tool?
Also - for generic reference, an answer of mine for a half-similar question (- some points are could also be relevant here):
Things worth considering :-
Tools such as YABE, VTS and Wireshark - to learn from the success cases/successful instances of communication.
The network card (NIC) that your tools and/or libraries are using/selecting to send the ('service' request) messages - e.g. definitely don't mix routable addresses with non-routable 'private' addresses (between the BACnet 'client' IP & the 'server' IP).
(UDPv4-only) 'Broadcasts' will only work upon the local network (- if a BBMD is not present & correctly set-up to relay the broadcast on to another part/hop of the "internetwork"/connected networks).
If you're unlucky - with a particular device, your client port just might have to be 47808/0xBAC0; and just possibly for the broadcasts too.
Also try directed/'unicast' traffic/'service' requests too - e.g. attempting to read the device object instance # (DOIN) of a target device; check you've got/are specifying the correct DOIN when targeting/firing a request at a device.
Does the target device have a BACnet router or BACnet gateway in front of it (- therefore would also need the inclusion of a DNET & DADR paired values as part of addressing it)?
If so, are you talking the same variant of BACnet, e.g. IP - as in BACnet/IP between both the (BACnet) 'client' & 'server'/serving device?
If it's a commercial/enterprise device, does it have a IP whitelist - to allow for the processing of incoming requests?
Related
I was using WSL to run ROS commands, and at a point i had to enable system to respond to broadcast icmp requests (for a multi master kind of a setup) i.e. on linux i had to make sure
cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/icmp_echo_ignore_broadcasts
returns 0. but WSL does not contain such a file, so i was thinking of enabling it on windows. All the sources i have gone through suggest me to add a rule to firewall but my system is not responding to broadcast ping even when my system's firewall is turned off(domain, private and public have been turned off same with my buddy who is no the same network). i am using an android phone's mobile hotspot to check this.
it would be great if someone could help me on this.
thanks in advance.
I asked something similar
I don't know how to do it purely on WSL. But on windows you have to start the "TCPSVCS.EXE" process. located on System32
Searched all over the place for a fix for this or even a good way to troubleshoot it. I've read the previous SO threads that seem to cover this issue but nothing in any of them has worked in my case.
Basically, I can't get access to anything that is being served via localhost on my mac in any browser on my Android device.
This is happening despite the fact they are connected to the same WIFI network and I am using the correct network address for my mac on which localhost is running (I have checked and double checked several times). I have no idea what the problem is because it worked perfectly fine before and I haven't changed anything that I believe would interfere with localhost access.
I don't have firewall or port blocking settings on my router either.
I have also tried on several different Android devices to eliminate it being a problem specific to one particular device.
Totally stumped. Any clues or hints on how to fix this would be much appreciated!
***** UPDATE *****
I tried using python -m SimpleHTTPServer 3000and it works. The site is accessible on my Android device. So I am pretty sure it is not a network issue per se.
The site is essentially a Node app which I built using the angular-quickstart template found here. It launches lite-server when npm start is run. Hope that gives some further insight into what the problem might be.
If you open up a terminal on your mac and then run the command ifconfig it will tell you what ip address all your interfaces have. It is probably your en0 interface. That ip address should be used in your browser on your Android device.
You will have to make user that you server (web) is binding to the correct ip address as well. You could be binding to all ip addresses if possible.
Sorry for the rather long post.
I need some input regarding a project that I am going to undertake.
I am trying to make an application that collects kernel debugging information from a guest Linux OS, located inside a VmWare Virtual Machine, and send them to a host OS efficiently.
So far, I have found a similar project, but written for Windows[1].
The author of the project wrote a DLL that is loaded into memory, and replaces the implementation of the KdSendPacket and KdReceivePacket functions, to use the VmWare GuestRpc[2] mechanism, instead of the slow serial port.
The data are then send to a debugging application on the host(Kd or WinDbg) trough a named pipe.
The author claims that there is a speed-up up to 45%, by avoiding the serial port transmission.
I am trying to achieve something similar ,but for Linux, and try to make the debugging process a little faster, than using the serial port.
My concrete questions are :
Do any similar applications exist?
I didn't manage to find any.
Would such an application be worth it ,comparing its functionality to netconsole[3], for example?
What method of intercepting printk messages would you suggest ?
Is there an equivalent of KdSendPacket/KdReceivePacket on Linux ?
[1]. http://virtualkd.sysprogs.org/dox/operation.html
[2]. http://articles.sysprogs.org/kdvmware/guestrpc.shtml
[3]. http://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/netconsole.txt
Using the serial port is really suboptimal.. even the (virtual) network would be preferable to that, but getting back to host-guest IPC channels, VMware's VMCI comes to mind.
many approaches can use to achieve your goal, below methods can be applied if network is connected:
use syslog service and transfer log though network to your server:
syslogd, syslogng seems support sending log to a log server with some filter critiera.
directly call tcp/udp socket functions in your kernel module to sends your collected data back to server.
other approaches, you may write application on host machine that calls hypervisor's share memory access function to read the memory buffer of your kernel module. However, the xen/kvm hypervisor both support these apis and i am not sure about weather vmware have this kind of library.
I'm setting up a linux server in a VM for my development.
Previously I've had PHP, MySQL etc etc all installed locally on my Mac. Apart from being a security risk, it's a drag to maintain and keep up to date, and there's a risk that an OS upgrade will wipe part of your setup out as the changes you make are fairly non-standard.
Having the entire server contained within a VM makes it easily upgradable and portable between machines. It means I can have the same configuration as the destination server and with shared folders even if the VM gets corrupted my work is safe on the host machine.
Previously with the local installation I was able to develop on convenient URLs like http://site.dev. I'd quite like to carry this over to the VM way of development but I'm struggling to figure out how, if it's possible at all.
Here's the problem:
In Bridged mode, the VM is part of the same network as the host. This is great but I can't choose a fixed IP address as I may be joining other networks and that address may be taken already. I'd like a consistent way of addressing my VM.
In NAT mode I can't directly address the VM without using port forwarding. I can use http://site.dev if I use the hosts file to forward that to localhost and then localhost:8080 forwards to the vm:80. The trouble is I have to access http://site.dev:8080 which is inconvenient for URL construction.
Does anyone know a way around this? I'm using ubuntu server and virtualbox.
Thanks!
The answer is to define a separate host-only network adapter and use that for host->guest communication.
You can do this by powering down the guest and adding the adapter in the VM settings. Once that's done you can boot the guest again and configure the new network interface however suits you best. I chose a fixed IP address in an unused range.
I have tried using several commands as well as couple of examples using C/C++ but am still not able to find a flawless method that can differentiate between physical or virtual ethernet adapters. Physical means, on that available on your board or installed externally and virtual means created by virtualization apps such as VirtualBox/VMWare/Virtual PC or VPN etc.
Any pointers?
There is no flawless method. A virtual adapter can have any MAC address, including one that might have been assigned by a constructor to a physical device. And the other way around, given that one can change the MAC address of a physical adapter. You can only make an educated guess.
You might find it easier to detect if you are running virtualized at all, rather than look for specific information about the NICs. The virt-what(1) tool looks through aspects of the running system to guess if the system is virtualized or not. (The script isn't as smart as you think, but it does have a lot of small information gathering tools in one place.)
Someone intentionally trying to bypass a license check would probably not find it difficult to defeat this mechanism.
Maybe one can use mii-tool and check if it fails, which it does for virtual:
mii-tool vmbr2
SIOCGMIIPHY on 'vmbr2' failed: Operation not supported
mii-tool eno1
eno1: negotiated 1000baseT-FD flow-control, link ok
EDIT:
What is mii-tool: view, manipulate media-independent interface status
This utility checks or sets the status of a network interface's
Media Independent Interface (MII) unit. Most fast ethernet
adapters use an MII to autonegotiate link speed and duplex
setting.
https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/mii-tool.8.html