Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Everyone says Skype is VOIP based application. Can anyone explain how Skype works on VOIP?
VoIP is a technology that can be used to provide voice communication (in apps for example).
Apple puts is this way:
A Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) app allows the user to make
phone calls using an Internet connection instead of the device’s
cellular service. Such an app needs to maintain a persistent network
connection to its associated service so that it can receive incoming
calls and other relevant data. Rather than keep VoIP apps awake all
the time, the system allows them to be suspended and provides
facilities for monitoring their sockets for them. When incoming
traffic is detected, the system wakes up the VoIP app and returns
control of its sockets to it.
Basically, it is a group of technologies for the delivery of voice communications over Internet Protocol (IP) networks, such as the Internet.
I do not believe that there is something special about the implementation of Skype, there are lots and lots of VoIP apps out there (Viber, iCall etc.). Have a look at this Ray Wenderlich tutorial on how to implement VoIP in iOS, scroll down to Providing VoIP Services.
Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
Is it possible to open an android application and perform a certain task as a response to google assistant chat. how to code the google assistant app in node.js for that?
The short answer is no. And in most cases, you don't want to do this anyway. The Assistant runs on multiple platforms, not just Android, and is meant for more of a conversational user interface.
A slightly longer answer is that, while it is possible, it would be a bad idea. The Assistant is good for hands-free, and sometimes eyes-free, operation, and directing the user to an application treats it just as a launcher. The better solution would be to move some of the logic you have in your app into a webhook and provide a conversational way to get the same information.
If you insist on going to an app, however, there are two ways you can do this:
You can have your webhook (node.js in your case) trigger a notification using something like Firebase Cloud Messaging which would either create a notification on your device or trigger an intent in your app.
You can return a basic card containing a link URL that will trigger an Intent in your app.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I am implementing a 2-player tetris game on the web. One of my colleagues told me that I can implement it or use a web server.
Since this is a game, I think I must implement a server part. What is the point of using a web server in a game development?
The server keeps track of the game while the clients (the 2 people player Tetris) just deal with the UI and User inputs.
Server
The server should be in charge of making sure that moves are legal, calculating points, and anything else related to the rules and running of the game. This is where the logic of the game is or where the game is played.
Client
This is ONLY used for interacting with the server. There should exists a protocol between the Server and the Client. The client will only send requests to the server, wait for a response and update the UI appropriately. No game logic should be implemented here.
The purpose of the server is to talk to each of the clients and bounce data between them. If you need a server for your Tetris game you probably want to have a look into NODE.JS, PHP and WEB sockets.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
What should be the characteristics/features of M2M protocols (MQTT/OPC UA/XMPP) for which the protocols can be compared? I would like to write an article about these protocols and would like to compare them on the basis of these characteristics. You can suggest some characteristics for M2M protocols comparison. such as: Security, Data bandwidth,scalability, over-head in data packets etc. Thanks
A comparison of the M2M protocols based on characteristics, like any other comparisons, should be made in a certain context. In this case, the context refers to the domain or the application domain you are using for building the comparison.
An application for a certain domain usually has a set of requirements that need to be met. Building a list of common requirements is a sensible thing to do. Not only it will improve the structure of the article, but it will also offer the possibility to expand/improve the article as new requirements are being discovered. By analysing these requirements you can find some fine-grained criteria that you can choose to discuss.
Functional requirements
Interoperability
Interface for:
device - gateway,
device - network application server,
device - device
Protocol load: information volume, connectionless/connection- oriented
Routing capability
IP based/non IP based
Communication patterns
Resource discovery
Resource management
Stateful/Stateless
Non-functional requirements
Scalability
Security
Privacy
Lightweight
Real-time
Expandability
Usability
Openness
Reliability
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I have one Windows 7 machine with one *.exe application (app-target) using TCP to connect to some server.
I need to know if there is a way I could write an app (app-tester) in any language, that will run on the same machine at the same time as app-target, that send packets to that server, masquerading as app-target.
I'm aware of some TCP attacks (man in the middle for example), but I'm not quite sure about the implementation of this particular attack. I need to know how to implement it.
Any info / link will be welcome. A web search ends up with many different concepts.
Update
I have read about TCP Sequence Prediction Attack, and seems to be a starting point. But that attack relies on leaving the application unresponsive. I want the application to be running as well, so I believe the way to go would be using a Proxy.
So now the question, more specific, is how do you force an app to be a proxy of another, in terms of networking?
You're overthinking this. TCP doesn't know know which application incoming packets are from. It only knows what host and port they come from. From the TCP point of view, all you need to do is open a connection.
However the application may have an authentication/authorisation protocol, such as a username/password exchange, a client SSL certificate, etc. You'll have to research the actual application you're communicating with to determine that.
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
I'd like to uniquely identify all wireless devices (phones, tablets, etc) within range. I don't care how far the devices are nor do I need to send them anything. I just want to be able to say: phone ABC was in this zone between 9:00 - 9:30, and 17:00 - 18:00.
I was thinking of sniffing Wifi packets but it seems that some phones avoid sending Probe Request packets, furthermore it's difficult to get Wifi cards into Monitor Mode. I've been unable to find any information on EDGE/3G detection.
I'm trying to measure queuing time similar to what they do in Finland.
The approach must "uniquely identify" the device. Meaning I want to be able to differentiate between the same device entering the zone multiple times versus new devices entering.
The approach must collect "anonymous" data, meaning I don't want to record any information that would allow someone to figure out the owner's identity.
What's the best way to detect the presence of mobile devices?