Yes, we were trying to be symmetric in our handling with TCP/UDP but have to consider the sessionless UDP. We decided to configure the receiver as the acceptor and the sender as the connector.
Thank you for your suggestions. -----Original Message----- From: Emmanuel Lécharny [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 2:13 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: UDP IoHandler notifications Le 10/18/12 5:47 AM, Dhruv Chopra a écrit : > You may want to look in to "SIP". At the very least, when a client is up > and running - it needs to send a special REGISTER message containing its > name/id to the server. On receiving this the server would associate that > name/id with the source IP address. After this the client needs to send > periodic keep-alives or else the server can delete the mapping. > > I recently worked on UDP and you also would like to read about "UDP > punching" if your clients are going to be behind NATs. In any case, as soon as the client send an UDP message to the server, the problem will be solved. The server could also broadcast messages, all the client should receive them, and dscard them if they are not interested in the message, but that means the server should have a session, which it currently does not have... -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
