I have a remote control for 4 Devices running on a node server.
Each device has its own page (/1, /2, /3, /4), but they are all generated from the same html/js.
the only difference is the ip for each device, loaded from a json on the server depending on the url path.
This all works, but the problem is: i have 3 obviously wrong IPs entered for testing purposes, and one correct one. Now if i open the correct one, go back to the parent page and open the page of a device with a wrong IP, it is still shown as online and can be controlled.
I understand this like: the socket stays open across the pages and is actually not built new on every site.
how can i make sure that each subpage generates a new socket?
right now, i just have
socket = new io.connect();
in the browser.js,
ioServer.on('connection', function (socket) {
//etc.
}
in the app.js and it works for ONE device.
Am I right to assume that I need some kind of "destroy socket if page is changed"-function?
Thanks for the help
By the looks of it, you only want to instantiate and boot a device when the device's client connects for the first time and emits 'startup'. If this is not the case, I'd probably instantiate and boot each device when the server starts.
Going with the first case, I'd store your devices in a key-value object and reuse them when needed.
var devices = {};
ioServer.on('connection', function (socket) {
var client_ip_address = socket.request.connection.remoteAddress;
console.log("New Connection from: " + client_ip_address);
var device;
socket.on('startup', function (data) {
var deviceId = data.device;
console.log("[INFO] startup: device " + deviceId);
//If this device is already in devices, resuse it
if (deviceId in devices) {
//Get the device from your devices object
device = devices[deviceId];
//Otherwise, create a new device and store it in devices
} else {
device = new HyperDeck(deviceId);
//Store new device in devices object
devices[deviceId] = device;
device.boot();
}
console.log(device.id);
console.log(device.ip);
});
...
Related
How to check all incoming requests from paired BLE device to current device?
I think it possible with Events, maybe UWP have needle event, or i must implement custom event, but where is the right way?
Microsoft have explainations about GATT Server, i think it's not what i need, 'cause i don't need a server with services and characteristics, i need only check incoming request and parse passed data in my application.
I'm not found sure way for checking incoming requests, but i make some trick.
Application can subscribe for notifications from device (in my case it's Mi Band 2) and receive some data from this device across ValueChanged.
One time i call ValueChanged handler in App.xaml.cs after connecting and pairing device and this working on all application, i don't need call it again and again.
Here is App.xaml.cs part of code.
protected async override void OnLaunched(LaunchActivatedEventArgs e)
{
Frame rootFrame = Window.Current.Content as Frame;
MiBand2SDK.MiBand2 band = new MiBand2SDK.MiBand2();
var page = typeof(Views.AuthPage);
// Checking for device availability and current session
if (_LocalSettings.Values["isAuthorized"] != null
&& await band.ConnectAsync())
{
if (e.PreviousExecutionState == ApplicationExecutionState.NotRunning && await band.Auth.AuthenticateAsync())
page = typeof(Views.MainPage);
else if (band.Auth.IsAuthenticated())
page = typeof(Views.MainPage);
// Here we are, this notification handler of responses from the band.
band.HeartRate.SetNotificationHandler();
}
else
{
System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("Not Authenticated...");
}
// other part of code...
Here is HeartRate.SetNotificationHandler() code:
public async void SetNotificationHandler()
{
_heartRateMeasurementCharacteristic = await Gatt.GetCharacteristicByServiceUuid(HEART_RATE_SERVICE, HEART_RATE_MEASUREMENT_CHARACTERISTIC);
Debug.WriteLine("Subscribe for HeartRate notifications from band...");
if (await _heartRateMeasurementCharacteristic.WriteClientCharacteristicConfigurationDescriptorAsync(GattClientCharacteristicConfigurationDescriptorValue.Notify) == GattCommunicationStatus.Success)
// Just subscribe for notifications and set ValueChanged. It's all.
_heartRateMeasurementCharacteristic.ValueChanged += HeartRateMeasurementCharacteristicValueChanged;
}
Hope it helps someone...
I'm trying to make a game, which works on rooms, lobby and such (imagine the chat app, except with additional checks/information storing).
Let's say, I have a module room.js
var EventEmitter = require('events');
class Room extends EventEmitter {
constructor (id, name) {
super();
this.id = id;
this.name = name;
this.users = [];
}
}
Room.prototype.addUser = function (user) {
if(this.users.indexOf(user) === -1) {
this.users.push(user);
this.emit('user_joined', user);
} else {
/* error handling */
}
};
module.exports = {
Room: Room,
byId: function (id) {
// where should I look up?
}
};
How can I get exactly this object (with events)? How can I access events emitted by this object?
In a single instance of node, I would do something like:
var rooms = [];
var room = new Room(1234, 'test room');
room.on('user_joined', console.log);
rooms.push(room);
Also, I don't quite understood how Redis is actually helping (is it replacement of EventEmitter?)
Regards.
EDIT: Would accept PM2 solutions too.
Instead of handling rooms in Node, you can replace them with channels in Redis).
When a new client wants to join in a room, the NodeJS app returns it the ID of this given room (that is to say the name of the channel), then the client suscribes to the selected room (your client is directly connected to Redis.
You can use a Redis Set to manage the list of rooms.
In this scenario, you don't need any event emitter, and your node servers are stateless.
Otherwise, it would mean Redis would be exposed on the Internet (assuming your game is public), so you must activate Redis authentication. A major problem with this solution is that you have to give the server password to all clients, so it's definitely unsecure.
Moreover, Redis' performances allow brute force attacks so exposing it on Internet is not recommended. That's why I think all communications should go through a Node instance, even if Redis is used as a backend.
To solve this, you can use socket.io to open sockets between Node and your clients, and make the Node instances (not the client) subscribe to the Redis channel. When a message is published by Redis, send it to the client through the socket. And add a layer of authentication to ensure only valid clients connect to a given channel.
Event emitter is not required. It's the Redis client which will be an event emitter (like in this example based on ioRedis)
I am trying to make a chat system where only two users are able to talk to each other at a time ( much like facebook's chat )
I've tried multiplexing, using mongoDB's _id as the name so every channel is unique.
The problem I'm facing is that I cannot direct a message to a single client connection.
this is the client side code that first sends the message
$scope.sendMessage = function() {
specificChannel.send(message)
$scope.messageText = '';
};
this is the server side receiving the message
specificChannel.on('connection', function (conn) {
conn.on('data', function(message){
conn.write('message')
}
}
When I send a message, to any channel, every channel still receives the message.
How can I make it so that each client only listens to the messages sent to a specific channel?
It appeared that SockJS doesn't support "private" channels. I used the following solution for a similar issue:
var channel_id = 'my-very-private-channel'
var connection = new SockJS('/pubsub', '')
connection.onopen = function(){
connection.send({'method': 'set-channel', 'data': {'channel': channel_id}})
}
Backend solution is specific for every technology stack so I can't give a universal solution here. General idea is the following:
1) Parse the message in "on_message" function to find the requested "method name"
2) If the method is "set-channel" -> set the "self.channel" to this value
3) Broadcast further messages to subscribers with the same channel (I'm using Redis for that, but it also depends on your platform)
Hope it helps!
I have a node.js running which the users will connect to. The offer and answer will be generated and sent through node.js.
I'm trying to establish a peer connection and send over a camera stream. I tried my code without using ICE candidates as the computers where in the same subnet. I tried to implement ICE afterwards. I'm not sure if i've done it right though or if it's even needed if the computers are on the same subnet.
var localStream;
//Connect to signaling server
var signalingChannel = io.connect('http://85.134.54.193:8001');
console.log("Connect to signaling server");
var servers = null;
var video1;
var video2;
var audio1;
var audio2;
var cfg = {"iceServers":[{"url":"stun:stun.l.google.com:19302"}]};//{ "iceServers": [{ "url": "stun:stun.l.google.com:19302" }] };
var con = { 'optional': [{'DtlsSrtpKeyAgreement': true}, {'RtpDataChannels': true }] };
var peerConnection;
//Runs after the page has been loaded
window.onload=function(){
//Gets ID for the video element which will display the local stream
video1 = document.getElementById("audio1");
//Gets ID for the video element which will display the remote stream
video2 = document.getElementById("audio2");
audio1 = document.getElementById("audio1");
audio2 = document.getElementById("audio2");
}
//Start button function
function caller(){
peerConnection = new webkitRTCPeerConnection(cfg);
navigator.webkitGetUserMedia({'audio':true, video:true}, function (stream) {
console.log("Got local audio", stream);
video1.src = window.webkitURL.createObjectURL(stream)
peerConnection.addStream(stream);
},
function ( err ) {
console.log( 'error: ', err );
});
console.log("Calling");
//Create Offer
peerConnection.createOffer(function (offerDesc) {
console.log("Created local offer", offerDesc.sdp);
peerConnection.setLocalDescription(offerDesc);
}, function () { console.warn("Couldn't create offer"); });
//ICE Candidates Generator
peerConnection.onicecandidate = function(evt) {
//When The Ice Gathering is complete
if (evt.target.iceGatheringState == "complete") {
//Create a new offer with ICE candidates
peerConnection.createOffer(function(offer) {
console.log("Offer with ICE candidates: " + offer.sdp);
signalingChannel.emit('offer', JSON.stringify(offer));
console.log("offer sent");
signalingChannel.on('answer', function(data){
console.log("Receive answer");
//The answer is set as the remote description for the offerer
peerConnection.setRemoteDescription(new RTCSessionDescription(JSON.parse(data)));
console.log("Set remote desc");
peerConnection.onaddstream = gotRemoteStream;
console.log("Add remote stream to peer connection");
});
});
}
}
}
function answerer(){
peerConnection = new webkitRTCPeerConnection(cfg);
navigator.webkitGetUserMedia({'audio':true, video:true}, function (stream) {
console.log("Got local audio", stream);
video1.src = window.webkitURL.createObjectURL(stream)
peerConnection.addStream(stream);
},
function ( err ) {
console.log( 'error: ', err );
});
console.log("Answering");
//Listen for offer
signalingChannel.on('offer', function(data){
console.log("Offer Received");
//Set the remote description from caller's local description
peerConnection.setRemoteDescription(new RTCSessionDescription(JSON.parse(data)));
//Generate answer after getting the remote description
peerConnection.createAnswer(function(sessionDescription) {
//Set local description
peerConnection.setLocalDescription(sessionDescription);
//The local desc will be the answer sent back to offerer
signalingChannel.emit('answer', JSON.stringify(sessionDescription));
console.log("Answer sent");
});
});
}
function gotRemoteStream(event){
video2.src = window.webkitURL.createObjectURL(event.stream);
}
Here is a sequence of events I have working today (Feb 2014) in Chrome. This is for a simplified case where peer 1 will stream video to peer 2.
Set up some way for the peers to exchange messages. (The variance in how people accomplish this is what makes different WebRTC code samples so incommensurable, sadly. But mentally, and in your code organization, try to separate this logic out from the rest.)
On each side, set up message handlers for the important signalling messages. You can set them up and leave them up. There are 3 core messages to handle & send:
an ice candidate sent from the other side ==> call addIceCandidate with it
an offer message ==> SetRemoteDescription with it, then make an answer & send it
an answer message ===> SetRemoteDescription with it
On each side, create a new peerconnection object and attach event handlers to it for important events: onicecandidate, onremovestream, onaddstream, etc.
ice candidate ===> send it to other side
stream added ===> attach it to a video element so you can see it
When both peers are present and all the handlers are in place, peer 1 gets a trigger message of some kind to start video capture (using the getUserMedia call)
Once getUserMedia succeeds, we have a stream. Call addStream on the peer 1's peer connection object.
Then -- and only then -- peer 1 makes an offer
Due to the handlers we set up in step 2, peer 2 gets this and sends an answer
Concurrently with this (and somewhat obscurely), the peer connection object starts producing ice candidates. They get sent back and forth between the two peers and handled (steps 2 & 3 above)
Streaming starts by itself, opaquely, as a result of 2 conditions:
offer/answer exchange
ice candidates received, exchanged, and added
When I want to change the stream, I go back to step 3 and set up a new peer connection object and do the whole offer/answer again.
Why do you wait for ICE to complete before creating an answer? what about doing them simultaneously? That might help, as it is just meant to work simultaneously. If you can post your logs after this when it would still not work we can try debugging it even further. If you want to see an audio-only example of this (it sends both music-audio and microphone-audio) check here, and the github source. Server made with node.js and ws plugin. The audio connection works with webRTC.
I am trying to develop a Video Client/functionality that captures video using webcam and transfers to other servent (server-client) somewhere on the internet. I am using UDPCLient Class to do that.
I want my application to be able to listen and tarnsmit video captured from webcam. The capturing, transmission and receiving works fine when i do that on local network.
But when i test the application from behind router (across two differnt networks/internet) after forwarding respective ports, the internet connectivity is lost on both routers (They hang up or something) and i need to restart the routers or switch to an alternate connection. The configuration is as follows:
Servent 1 <--> Router1 <--> Internet Connection#01
Servent 02 <---> Router2 <---> Internet Connection#02
Both connections are on separate DSL Line. One of the routers is ZTE brand and the other is of Netgear.
Code for listenning/transmission is as follows:
private void StartSockets()
{
//For testing across internet i use IPAddress obtained via different function
var IPAddress = getMyIpAddress();
this.udpSender = new UdpClient(IpAddress, 4000);
this.udpListener = new UdpClient(4000);
}
private IPAddress getMyIpAddress()
{
IPAddress localIP ;//= AddressAr[0];
localIP = IPAddress.Parse(GetPublicIP());
return localIP;
}
public string GetPublicIP()
{
String direction = "";
WebRequest request = WebRequest.Create("http://checkip.dyndns.org/");
using (WebResponse response = request.GetResponse())
{
using (StreamReader stream = new StreamReader(response.GetResponseStream()))
{
direction = stream.ReadToEnd();
}
}
//Search for the ip in the html
int first = direction.IndexOf("Address: ") + 9;
int last = direction.LastIndexOf("</body>");
direction = direction.Substring(first, last - first);
return direction;
}
Code for receiving response is as follows:
private void ReceiveData()
{
//For testing across internet i use IPAddress obtained via different function
var IPAddress = getMyIpAddress();
IPEndPoint ep = new IPEndPoint(IPAddress, myPort);
try
{
byte[] receiveBytes = this.udpListener.Receive(ref ep);
this.OnReadImage(new ImageEventArgs(this.ByteToImage(receiveBytes)));
}
catch (Exception)
{
}
}
If i test on local network , i use DNSHostname to get ip address (private ip addresses) and video works fine on local network. That does not work over internet so i switch to live Ip Address and thus i use the method of getPublicIpAddress().
I know there is something seriously wrong with my approach? What would be right approach?
Should i switch to TCP Listenner? I intend to have multiple receiver of same video in future. So would that affect?
Can UDP clients cause routers to crash, hang up and restart? How can i avoid that?
Lastly, if were to avoid port-forwarding what would be the best strategy?
Please help.
Thanks
Steve