It seems like each broadcast packet is broadcasted as many times as
the number of network interface cards in Windows and SunOS. It's
interesting that Linux doesn't. Maarten, did I understand correctly?
I'd like to find a way to suppress the duplicate event emission, but
don't have any idea yet.
Thanks,
Trustin
On 9/18/07, Maarten Bosteels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also tested it on a Solaris box with just one network interface:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$ ifconfig -a
> lo0: flags=2001000849<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4,VIRTUAL> mtu 8232
> index 1
> inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff000000
> hme0: flags=1000843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4> mtu 1500 index 2
> inet 172.30.0.139 netmask ffff0000 broadcast 172.30.255.255
> ether 8:0:20:e6:85:18
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$ uname -a
> SunOS mercury 5.10 Generic_118833-24 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-250
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$ java -cp mina-core-2.0.0-M1-SNAPSHOT.jar:. TestTrustin
> Local host: mercury/172.30.0.139
> Open: (datagram, server, /172.30.0.139:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234)
> Received: (datagram, server, /172.30.0.139:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234),
> HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=1 cap=2048: 00]
> Received: (datagram, server, /172.30.0.139:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234),
> HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=2 cap=2048: 00 00]
> Received: (datagram, server, /172.30.0.139:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234),
> HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=3 cap=2048: 00 00 00]
> Received: (datagram, server, /172.30.0.139:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234),
> HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=4 cap=2048: 00 00 00 00]
> unbound
> Closed: (datagram, server, /172.30.0.139:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234)
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$
>
> Maarten
>
> On 9/18/07, Maarten Bosteels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 9/18/07, Trustin Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > How many network devices exist in SunOS?
> >
> >
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] # ifconfig -a
> > lo0: flags=2001000849<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4,VIRTUAL> mtu 8232
> > index 1
> > inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff000000
> > ce0: flags=1000843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4> mtu 1500 index 2
> > inet 192.168.113.8 netmask ffffff00 broadcast 192.168.113.255
> > ether 0:14:4f:17:d:de
> > ce1: flags=1000802<BROADCAST,MULTICAST,IPv4> mtu 1500 index 3
> > inet 0.0.0.0 netmask 0
> > ether 0:14:4f:17:d:df
> > ce2: flags=1000802<BROADCAST,MULTICAST,IPv4> mtu 1500 index 4
> > inet 0.0.0.0 netmask 0
> > ether 0:14:4f:17:d:e0
> > eri0: flags=1000843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,IPv4> mtu 1500 index 5
> > inet 10.0.0.120 netmask ffffff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
> > ether 0:3:ba:b0:49:65
> > eri0:1: flags=1040843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST,DEPRECATED,IPv4> mtu
> > 1500 index 5
> > inet 10.0.0.130 netmask ffffff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
> >
> > Maarten
> >
> > Thanks!
> > > Trustin
> > >
> > > On 9/18/07, Maarten Bosteels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On SunOS 5.10 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Fire-V890
> > > >
> > > > java version " 1.5.0_01"
> > > > Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.5.0_01-b08)
> > > > Java HotSpot(TM) Server VM (build 1.5.0_01-b08, mixed mode)
> > > >
> > > > Open: (datagram, server, /10.0.0.120:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234)
> > > > Received: (datagram, server, /10.0.0.120:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=1 cap=2048: 00]
> > > > Received: (datagram, server, /10.0.0.120:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=2 cap=2048: 00 00]
> > > > Received: (datagram, server, /10.0.0.120:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=3 cap=2048: 00 00 00]
> > > > Received: (datagram, server, /10.0.0.120:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=3 cap=2048: 00 00 00]
> > > > Received: (datagram, server, /10.0.0.120:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=4 cap=2048: 00 00 00 00]
> > > > Received: (datagram, server, /10.0.0.120:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=4 cap=2048: 00 00 00 00]
> > > > unbound
> > > > Closed: (datagram, server, /10.0.0.120:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234)
> > > >
> > > > Maarten
> > > >
> > > > On 9/18/07, Maarten Bosteels <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On linux 2.6.9, jdk 1.6
> > > > >
> > > > > Local host: mortimer/172.30.6.12
> > > > > Open: (datagram, server, /172.30.6.12:5678 => /0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1234)
> > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.30.6.12:5678 =>
> > > /0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1234),
> > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=1 cap=2048: 00]
> > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.30.6.12:5678 =>
> > > /0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1234),
> > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=2 cap=2048: 00 00]
> > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.30.6.12:5678 =>
> > > /0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1234),
> > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=3 cap=2048: 00 00 00]
> > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.30.6.12:5678 =>
> > > /0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1234),
> > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=4 cap=2048: 00 00 00 00]
> > > > > unbound
> > > > > Closed: (datagram, server, /172.30.6.12:5678 =>
> > > /0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1234)
> > > > >
> > > > > Adding a virtual interface (eth0:0) doesn't make a difference.
> > > > > Maarten
> > > > >
> > > > > On 9/18/07, Maarten Bosteels < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello Trustin,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I ran the code on Windows XP jdk 1.6 , and this is the output I
> > > got:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Local host: kweenie/172.29.100.104
> > > > > > Open: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234)
> > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 =>
> > > /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=2 cap=2048: 00 00]
> > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 =>
> > > /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=1 cap=2048: 00]
> > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 =>
> > > /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=3 cap=2048: 00 00 00]
> > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 =>
> > > /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=3 cap=2048: 00 00 00]
> > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 =>
> > > /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=3 cap=2048: 00 00 00]
> > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 =>
> > > /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=3 cap=2048: 00 00 00]
> > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 =>
> > > /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=4 cap=2048: 00 00 00 00]
> > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 =>
> > > /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=4 cap=2048: 00 00 00 00]
> > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 =>
> > > /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=4 cap=2048: 00 00 00 00]
> > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 =>
> > > /0.0.0.0:1234),
> > > > > > HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=4 cap=2048: 00 00 00 00]
> > > > > > Closed: (datagram, server, /172.29.100.104:5678 => /0.0.0.0:1234)
> > > > > > unbound
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I changed the code a little bit, to be able to distinguish the
> > > messages.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also added a sleep before the unbind, (I think there's one line
> > > missing
> > > > > > in your output :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > f1.getSession().write(ByteBuffer.allocate (1)).await();
> > > > > > f1.getSession().write( ByteBuffer.allocate(2)).await();
> > > > > >
> > > > > > f2.getSession().write(ByteBuffer.allocate(3)).await();
> > > > > > f2.getSession ().write(ByteBuffer.allocate(4)).await();
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thread.sleep(2000);
> > > > > > acceptor.unbind();
> > > > > > System.out.println ("unbound");
> > > > > > System.exit(0);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The messages sent to the broadcast address are received multiple
> > > times:
> > > > > > twice per enabled network connection.
> > > > > > When I enable all 4 network interfaces (LAN, wireless LAN and two
> > > > > > virtual ones for VMWare) I receive them 8 times !
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Maarten
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 9/17/07, Trustin Lee < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I made a lot of changes to the current datagram implementation
> > > in
> > > > > > > trunk. DatagramAcceptor now collaborates with DatagramConnector
> > > to
> > > > > > > create connected datagram socket which listens to the remote
> > > address
> > > > > > > of the received packet. The following is simplified description
> > > of
> > > > > > > flow:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > * DatagramAcceptor's underlying DatagramChannel.receive is
> > > invoked
> > > > > > > * Once data is received, new connected datagram session is
> > > created
> > > > > > > using DatagramConnector.connect (receivedRemoteAddress,
> > > > > > > acceptor.getLocalAddress()). If there's already a session
> > > instance
> > > > > > > associated with the remote address, it's reused.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The advantages of this implementation are:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > * The acceptor-side datagram sessions can perform much better in
> > > > > > > multi-core environment.
> > > > > > > * There's no need for IoSessionRecycler on the acceptor-side
> > > anymore.
> > > > > > > You have full control over disconnection; probably using
> > > sessionIdle
> > > > > > > event in most cases.
> > > > > > > * Code duplication can be reduced once again, and most part of
> > > the
> > > > > > > existing acceptor code can be extracted into a generic acceptor
> > > > > > > implementation.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The disadvantage is that it forces you to set reuseAddress to
> > > true,
> > > > > > > because multiple datagram channels are bound to the same local
> > > > > > > address.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In Linux, connected datagram channels have priority over
> > > unconnected
> > > > > > > channels, so most traffic will go directly into
> > > DatagramConnector's
> > > > > > > NIOProcessors. The only exception I've found is broadcast
> > > packets. It
> > > > > > > is always received from the unconnected channel in
> > > DatagramAcceptor.
> > > > > > > DatagramAcceptor immediately forwards the event to an
> > > appropriate
> > > > > > > session that DatagramConnector is managing, or creates a new
> > > session
> > > > > > > using connect().
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think this behavior won't have any big differences among
> > > different
> > > > > > > platforms (e.g. Windows and SUNOS). As long as multiple
> > > datagram
> > > > > > > channels can be bound to the same local address, this
> > > implementation
> > > > > > > should work fine. To make this sure, please run the following
> > > test
> > > > > > > code in your machine, and let me know what the result is:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -------- CODE BEGINS --------
> > > > > > > package net.gleamynode.tmp;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > import java.net.InetAddress;
> > > > > > > import java.net.InetSocketAddress;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > import org.apache.mina.common.ByteBuffer;
> > > > > > > import org.apache.mina.common.ConnectFuture;
> > > > > > > import org.apache.mina.common.IoHandlerAdapter ;
> > > > > > > import org.apache.mina.common.IoSession;
> > > > > > > import org.apache.mina.transport.socket.nio.DatagramAcceptor;
> > > > > > > import org.apache.mina.transport.socket.nio.DatagramConnector ;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > public class Main {
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > private static final int SERVER_PORT = 1234;
> > > > > > > private static final int CLIENT_PORT = 5678;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > public static void main(String args[]) throws Exception {
> > > > > > > DatagramAcceptor acceptor = new DatagramAcceptor();
> > > > > > > acceptor.setLocalAddress (new
> > > InetSocketAddress(SERVER_PORT));
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > acceptor.setHandler(new IoHandlerAdapter() {
> > > > > > > @Override
> > > > > > > public void sessionOpened(IoSession session) {
> > > > > > > System.out.println("Open: " + session);
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > @Override
> > > > > > > public void sessionClosed(IoSession session) {
> > > > > > > System.out.println("Closed: " + session);
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > @Override
> > > > > > > public void messageReceived(IoSession session,
> > > Object o) {
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > System.out.println("Received: " + session + ", "
> > > + o);
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > });
> > > > > > > acceptor.bind();
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > DatagramConnector connector = new DatagramConnector();
> > > > > > > connector.getSessionConfig().setReuseAddress(true);
> > > > > > > connector.setHandler(new IoHandlerAdapter() {
> > > > > > > @Override
> > > > > > > public void messageReceived(IoSession session,
> > > Object o) {
> > > > > > > System.out.println("ERR?");
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > });
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > // Print the local host.
> > > > > > > System.out.println ("Local host: " +
> > > InetAddress.getLocalHost
> > > > > > > ());
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > // Try point-to-point.
> > > > > > > ConnectFuture f1 = connector.connect (
> > > > > > > new InetSocketAddress(
> > > > > > > InetAddress.getLocalHost(),
> > > SERVER_PORT),
> > > > > > > new InetSocketAddress(
> > > > > > > InetAddress.getLocalHost(),
> > > CLIENT_PORT));
> > > > > > > f1.await();
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > f1.getSession().write(ByteBuffer.allocate(1)).await();
> > > > > > > f1.getSession().write(ByteBuffer.allocate(1)).await();
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > // Try broadcast.
> > > > > > > ConnectFuture f2 = connector.connect(
> > > > > > > new InetSocketAddress(
> > > > > > > " 255.255.255.255", SERVER_PORT),
> > > > > > > new InetSocketAddress(
> > > > > > > InetAddress.getLocalHost(),
> > > CLIENT_PORT));
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > f2.await();
> > > > > > > f2.getSession().write(ByteBuffer.allocate (1)).await();
> > > > > > > f2.getSession().write(ByteBuffer.allocate(1)).await();
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > acceptor.unbind();
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > System.exit(0);
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > -------- CODE ENDS --------
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The expected result is:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -------- RESULT BEGINS --------
> > > > > > > Local host: primary/127.0.0.1
> > > > > > > Open: (datagram, server, /127.0.0.1:5678 =>
> > > /0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1234)
> > > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /127.0.0.1:5678 =>
> > > > > > > /0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1234), HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=1 cap=2048: 00]
> > > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /127.0.0.1:5678 =>
> > > > > > > /0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1234), HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=1 cap=2048: 00]
> > > > > > > Received: (datagram, server, /127.0.0.1:5678 =>
> > > > > > > /0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1234), HeapBuffer[pos=0 lim=1 cap=2048: 00]
> > > > > > > Closed: (datagram, server, /127.0.0.1:5678 =>
> > > /0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1234)
> > > > > > > -------- RESULT ENDS --------
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If this test fails on any platform that runs Java 5, I am doomed
> > > to
> > > > > > > revert my changes. :)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Trustin
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > what we call human nature is actually human habit
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > http://gleamynode.net/
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > what we call human nature is actually human habit
> > > --
> > > http://gleamynode.net/
> > > --
> > > PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
> > >
> >
> >
>
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
