I am struggling with switching between multiple live streams. For example, I have five live streaming servers streaming(HTTP or RTSP) and I want to put some broker between those (five) streaming sources and destination so that output to the destination would be one video streaming (later I may change the streaming source again using switch). Broker plays role of switcher, My question is, is there such open source "switcher"? Or how this technology works?
here is link to similar question but I want some open source or some brief guidance about how it could be implemented: http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/117/858680
Thank You in advance
That answer can be an archive for the researchers
First Suggestion or Solution(Multicast Router)
You can use a Router or L3 Switch which is support IGMP protocol. That Router or L3 Switch must support IGMP protocol you can structure multicast IP address. You can configure L3 to switch all streaming. Multicast Ip address works within 224.0.0.0 to 239.255.255.255 and works based on device' mac address. You can create different multicast Ip address for the different type of switching scenarios. After finished Router or L3 Switch configuration, you only change IP address to switch streaming into your program. (I didn't mention Broadcast. Broadcast send data to all points. Multicast send data to certain points.)
Second Suggestion or Solution(Programming)
I am using Vlc.Dotnet wrapper for using the Vlc and libvlc libraries. It's open source. RTSP streaming is based on IP address and port number. I don't know any open source switch but you can write one of them for you with use Vlc.dotnet wrapper. You build 5 Streaming server and 1 control server. The Streaming Server's destination should be Control Server's IP. and you can control all data from control server with your basic switch program.
5 Streaming Servers : Sends data to Control server
1 Control Server : Controls and Switches data
I prefer to use Router or L3 Switch for make that. Because it's easier.
Related
I have a closed third party system that sends a unicast UDP stream (MPEG-TS) that I'd like to access in two different programs on the same computer. I can not change anything on the source, not even IP or Port.
Is there any other option than to write my own little program that captures the stream and then creates to new streams and resends both?
It seems that only one of the two destination programs handles multicast, so I need two unicast streams.
You should be able to use socat to forward unicast UDP to a multicast group, or just save data into a file and process later.
Edit 0:
Here is an example (this is on Linux - don't have any Windows boxes). Listen on unicast port 4242, forward to multicast 224.10.10.10:5252 (you might have to add ip-multicast-loop option if you are doing everything on the same machine):
~$ socat UDP-LISTEN:4242 UDP-DATAGRAM:224.10.10.10:5252
Receive on multicast (needs interface address or name), forwards to unicast 192.168.0.1:6666:
~$ socat UDP-RECVFROM:5252,ip-add-membership=224.10.10.10:eth0,reuseaddr,fork \
UDP-DATAGRAM:192.168.0.1:6666
Run two of the above with different destination addresses (reuseaddr option allows these to be run on the same machine).
I discovered almost accidentally that my machine was sending and receiving UDP packets to a machine in Poland. Not that I have any problem with Poland, I just don't know why my laptop has the need to communicate with a server there. Reverse DNS shows just the ISP providing the address to some end user. Using Wireshark, I can monitor the messages, which were indecipherable as they were probably encrypted. All packets sent from my machine had the same source port, so clearly the application that sent them opened this UDP socket to use it. I am searching for ways to:
1) enumerate all current sockets open in the system, including the process that created it and, for both TCP and UDP, what ports and addresses they are current bound to.
2) because applications can open these sockets, use them, and close them right away, I would love to find (or perhaps even write) a program that once started would somehow get notification each time a socket gets created, or really more importantly when bound to a source and/or destination address and port. For UDP, I would love to also be able to monitor/keep track of the destination IP addresses and ports that socket has sent messages to.
I don't want to monitor the traffic itself, I have Wireshark if I want to view the traffic. I want to be able to then cross reference to discover what application is generating the packets. I want to know if it is from a process I trust, or if it is something I need to investigate further.
Does anybody know of any applications (for the Windows platform) that can do this? If not, any ideas about a .NET or Windows API that provides this capability, should I want to write it myself?
Edit:
After further research - looks like the APIs to use are GetExtendedUdpTable and GetExtendedTcpTable, CodeProject.com has some samples wrapping these in .NET (see http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/14423/Getting-the-active-TCP-UDP-connections-using-the-G). So a combination of this API and some sniffer code would be needed to monitor and keep track of what hosts at what ports using what protocol any particular application on your machine is talking to. If I ever get some free time, I'll consider creating this, if you know of an app that does all this, please let me know.
Try SysInternals TCPView. Despite its name, it handles UDP as well.
netstat -b to enumerate all ports along with the process names.
You can try using SysInternals' Process MOnitor (ProcMon.exe or ProcMon64.exe).
It allows for filtering of Processes by "UDP Send" Operation - and provides detailed UDP Connection data, including source and destination addresses(IP) and ports etc.
I have to test the value from client to server using different protocols (Tcp , UDP , Sctp).
Please guide how it can be possible. Is there any way in windows to change the protocol or is there anyway to find it by using software like packet tracer .
Thanks
While the question is not entirely clear, it sounds as though your interested in seeing the information sent between the client and the server when each of those protocols is used.
Windows does not provide a built in utility to view packet data but it can be viewed using a packet analyser such as Wireshark.
In order to see the values sent by each protocol you must run a client for each of the protocols and use it to connect to the server for that protocol. If you don't have a server to connect to, you may need to run one on your local machine.
You can narrow down the data captured to just the protocol you're interested in using a filter in Wireshark If you don't know the protocol being used, you can filter by the port number used for that connection which can be established using the netstat command.
You may need to use netstat -b to show you which programs are using which ports.
If you just have to generate packets using different protocols then the tool like netcat can also help. It supports TCP and UDP and has been ported to windows .
How can i filter (allow, deny etc) outgoing packets in Windows? I want to search in TCP or UDP packet types to find in the data segment for example this "387602304fd236e048125453b1fa10c980e9dad4fa7f3f5dd2497c2e8b2b" and drop/block/deny the packet, if it matches the search hex string.
I have already tried WIPFW and PKTFILTER but they only serve IP source, dest, port etc filtering. They don't inspect the packet's data.
I think Berkeley Packet Filter doe's that job, but it's for unix...
Here is some to filter packet in windows:
WinDivert Free open source project work on Windows 7, 2008 or upper. network layer.
WinpkFilter 3.0 Commercial, Windows XP and upper. datalink layer
pcausa, Commercial. datalink layer
Windows Filtering Platform Packet Modification Sample
A sample to create callout driver that WinDivert use, you should now to implement kernel driver. network layer.
you can use SmartSniff in windows.
Starting from version 1.10, you can filter unwanted TCP/IP activity during the capture process (Capture Filter), or when displaying the captured TCP/IP data (Display Filter)
You want application level filtering then, (just changing the payload). If you want to be able to drop, I know you can hook into Winsock, which will allow you to capture packets as they go out and set up a filter there. Windows seven also added to their firewall, so you could use that API to grab outbound packets; I'm not sure if it will allow you to specifically alter the payload data, though.
Summary: I'm trying to create sockets to pass data between two physical interfaces that exist on the same machine, and Win32 sockets always forwards the traffic directly in the kernel instead of pushing through the physical interfaces. Is there any way to disable this behavior, perhaps through device settings, registry tweaks, routing table shenanigans, or socket options? We're using Windows XP SP3.
Some background. I'm attempting to build some completely automated IP tests to exercise our custom IPv4 equipment. We have a large lab of Windows XP machines, and individual physical ethernet interfaces for each device we're connecting to. Our devices are effectively ethernet routers each with their own IPs.
We need to send data out our lab machines, through our devices, then back into the same computer. We will be sending Unicast and Multicast UDP, TCP, and broadcast IP traffic through the devices.
We want (and likely need) the traffic to originate on the same machine it is destined to.
To do this, we configure two separate NICs each with their own IP on their own subnet, for instance NIC #1 with 10.0.0.1/24 and NIC #2 with 10.0.1.1/24. Our devices then act like simple passthrough routers, and have two interfaces, one on the 10.0.0.0/24 subnet, one on the 10.0.1.0/24 subnet, which they just forward packets back and forth from.
To generate our data, we'd like to be able to use Win32 sockets, since it is well-understood, well-supported, what our customers are using, and would probably be the most rapid approach. Packet injection is probably feasible for UDP and broadcast IP, but very likely not so for TCP. I'd entertain ideas that used packet injection, but would strongly prefer standard Win32 sockets.
As stated in the summary, the packets never leave the machine. I've googled like a madman and I've not found much. Any ideas?
Use Windows' command-line ROUTE utility. You can configure it so any IP packet sent to a specific IP address on a specific Subnet gets sent to another IP/device. For example:
route ADD <NIC_1_IP> MASK <NIC_1_SUBNET> <DEVICE_IP_CONNECTED_TO_NIC_2> METRIC 1
route ADD <NIC_2_IP> MASK <NIC_2_SUBNET> <DEVICE_IP_CONNECTED_TO_NIC_1> METRIC 1
Alternatively, if you know the index numbers of the NIC interfaces, you can specify them instead:
route ADD <NIC_1_IP> MASK <NIC_1_SUBNET> METRIC 1 IF <NIC_2_INTF>
route ADD <NIC_2_IP> MASK <NIC_2_SUBNET> METRIC 1 IF <NIC_1_INTF>
This way, whenever a packet is sent to NIC #1's IP, the packet goes to the device connected to NIC #2, which will then pass it on to NIC #1. And vice versa for packets sent to NIC #2's IP.
For instance, this is a useful technique for allowing WireShark to capture local IP traffic if the PC is connected to a network with a router. Packets from one local IP/Port to another local IP/Port can be bounced off the router back to the PC so they travel through physical interfaces that WireShark can monitor (WireShark will see duplicate copies of each local packet - one outbound and one inbound - but you can filter out the duplicates).
Winsock is always going to bring the packet data up into the kernel space and deal with it there. Thats the whole point to a generic API is that any device is dealt with at the same "layer". If you want to stick with Winsock, I don't believe you can (or would want to) work around this behavior.
You can remove some of the buffer copying with TransmitPackets or TransmitFile, but not between two device interfaces.
That being said, are you having a performance issue with the additional buffer coping that Winsock performs? Security concerns?
How about running the endpoints of your tester inside of distinct virtual machines? Then you need only a single piece of hardware, but you'll have separate TCP/IP stacks that don't know each other are local (and most VM solutions pass the packet straight through the host unchanged, I don't think the host is going to grab the packet and send it straight to another VM unless you configure bridging between VMs... but you'll bind each VM to a different physical network adapter).