Is it possible to specify different ports for a single ASP.NET solution? I'd like to have one solution handling requests coming in on multiple ports, but returning responses that are specific to each port.
You can have your site in IIS to set multiple bindings with different ports. Then in your app use HttpContext.Current.Request.Url.Port to determine the port and respond accordingly.
Related
I have a handler deployed on IIS which proxies communication to specific URLs. I need to specify IP address for outbound communication called from this handler different than IP address for general communication from server.
I can isolate those handler to different IIS site if needed.
Currently, I'm redirecting requests for this handler to different server via ARR and URLRewrite, but I'd like to avoid this.
On linux, there is solution to use SRC-NAT rule for specific user, if process was owned by this user (https://serverfault.com/questions/236721/bind-process-or-user-to-specific-ip-linux).
EDIT: If handler was isolated to different site, this site also can be run in different application pool and/or different identity.
Thanks for any advice.
When we connect to socket.io, we have to define the server IP, or leave it blank if the files are hosted in the same server.
Each emit we fire, will be thrown on each socket connection.
If we have two applications on the same server,
all of the emits from app1 will be emitted in app2 and vice versa.
How to avoid this?
It depends upon what you mean by "two applications". If what you mean is two connections to the same socket.io server, then yes io.emit() is purposely designed to send to all connections to the current server.
If you have two separate socket.io servers on the same host, then those socket.io servers must be on separate ports (you can't have two actual servers on the same port) and when you io.emit() to one it will have nothing to do with the other because the io objects for the two servers will be completely different objects that are attached to completely different servers.
So, it really depends upon how you have things configured on the host. If you show your actual server-side code for your two servers, we could answer much more specifically.
If you just have one socket.io server and you're looking for ways to send a message to a group of connected sockets, you can either use namespaces or rooms. A namespace is something a client connects to. A room is something a server puts a connection into with .join(). You can then .emit() to either a namespace or a room and it will send to all sockets in that collection.
Could anyone please tell me what is the use of IP spoofing in terms of Performance Testing?
There are two main reasons for using IP spoofing while load testing a web application:
Routing stickiness (a.k.a Persistence) - Many load balancers use IP stickiness when distriuting incoming load across applications servers. So, if you generate the load from the same IP, you could load only one application server instead of distributing the load to all application servers (This is also called Persistence: When we use Application layer information to stick a client to a single server). Using IP spoofing, you avoid this stickiness and make sure your load is distributed across all application servers.
IP Blocking - Some web applications detect a mass of HTTP requests coming from the same IP and block them to defend themselves. When you use IP spoofing you avoid being detected as a harmful source.
When it comes to load testing of web applications well behaved test should represent real user using real browser as close as possible, with all its stuff like:
Cookies
Headers
Cache
Handling of "embedded resources" (images, scripts, styles, fonts, etc.)
Think times
You might need to simulate requests originating from the different IP addresses if your application (or its infrastructure, like load balancer) assumes that each user uses unique IP address. Also DNS Caching on operating system of JVM level may lead to the situation when all your requests are basically hitting only one endpoint while others remain idle. So if there is a possibility it is better to mimic the requests in that way so they would come from the different addresses.
I have to set sails app where I can have socket.io connections on multiple ports - for example authentication on port 3999 and data synchronization on port 4999.
Any way to do so ?
I asked a similar question yesterday and it seems that yours is also similar to mine, here's what I'm going to implement.
Given that you will have multiple instances that are going to work on different ports, they won't be able to talk to each other directly and that breaks websocket functionality.
It seems that there are multiple solutions to this (sticky sessions vs using the pub/sub functionality of Redis), I chose Redis. There's a module for that called socket.io-redis. You also need emitter module, it's here.
If you choose that route, no matter how many servers (multiple servers with multiple instances) OR many instances on a single server you run your app on, it will function without a problem thanks to Redis.
At least that's what I know for now, been searching for a few days, haven't tried it yet.
Not to mention, you can use Nginx for load balancing, like below. (Copied from socket.io docs)
upstream io_nodes {
ip_hash;
server 127.0.0.1:6001;
server 127.0.0.1:6002;
server 127.0.0.1:6003;
server 127.0.0.1:6004;
}
This may not be the correct place for this question as it's part networking, but here goes.
I am wanting to put together a WebApi (using the ASP.NET MVC WebApi framework) to be consumed by client machines external to our network. However the client machines resolve web traffic through a proxy server for which our software does not have authentication. We have noticed that outgoing FTP connections are possible though.
So I am wondering whether we can host the webapi and have client machines connect out through Port 21? Does that even make sense? Sorry if it's a stupid question.
I managed to find some answers and thought I would share for anyone that might be interested.
Binding WebApi to ports other than 80
This is possible, but tricky. When you publish the Api project onto IIS (or wherever you are hosting it) you just bind it to an alternative port. You then also make sure you forward that port in your router. Then, clients of the API just specify the host using your custom port to access the endpoint through that port: http://myhostname.com:21/api/values or whatever.
Complications
Testing the endpoints can be tricky as Chrome blocks HTTP traffic being sent via some ports - port 21 is one such port. So to test it you need to write a client exe that can hit the endpoints to make sure they are working (like a console application).
Despite figuring all of this out, I still could not connect out through the firewall. I suspect that some configuration is blocking the traffic because even though it is going out through an open port (21), it is not FTP traffic: it's HTTP traffic.
A Solution
It occurred to me that SOAP operates through a range of protocols (FTP, SMTP, HTTP, to name a few) and formats its messages as XML. So in this scenario it would make more sense to use a SOAP service via Port 21 rather than REST which is strictly HTTP.