[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

microsoft.public.dotnet.framework

trying out UDP socket, and failing.... (on Vista

Lloyd Dupont

6/17/2008 2:33:00 PM

I think Vista might be the culprit....
Anyway, could anyone share with me how to send some data over UDP and
recieve it?
Now it's not working, and I have no clue if it's the sending or recieving or
both which fails....

Anyway I have simple code like that:

=== send ====
public void Send(byte[] data, IPEndPoint to)
{
using (Socket sock = new Socket(to.AddressFamily, SocketType.Dgram,
ProtocolType.Udp))
sock.SendTo(data, SocketFlags.None, to);
}


=== recieve ===
void Receiving()
{
byte[] rbuf = new byte[1 << 14];
using (Socket sock = new Socket(AddressFamily.InterNetwork,
SocketType.Dgram, ProtocolType.Udp))
while (true)
{
EndPoint rep = new IPEndPoint(IPAddress.Any, 0);
int read = sock.ReceiveFrom(rbuf, ref rep);
Recieved(rbuf, read, rep);
}
}
void Recieved(byte[] buf, int nRead, EndPoint where)
{
Console.WriteLine("Recieved {0} byte(s) from {1}", nRead, where);
}

===========
3 Answers

Lloyd Dupont

6/17/2008 2:58:00 PM

0

Never mind,I found it!
I should also (in the listening code)

sock.Bind(new IPEndPoint(IPAddress.Any, aPort))


Pay attention to 'aPort' I should use the same port for target IPEndPoint
when sending data

Peter Duniho

6/17/2008 3:21:00 PM

0

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 07:33:00 -0700, Lloyd Dupont <ld@galador.removeme.net>
wrote:

> I think Vista might be the culprit....
> Anyway, could anyone share with me how to send some data over UDP and
> recieve it?
> Now it's not working, and I have no clue if it's the sending or
> recieving or both which fails....

Usually it's a firewall or NAT router issue. The first step is to test
the code on a single machine (both sending and receiving), to eliminate
the possibility of a router causing issues (though you may still have to
deal with it later). Vista and XP SP2 both come with a firewall that's
enabled by default. Though, I was under the impression that Vista would
prompt you if it detected a need to change the firewall settings based on
what the code's doing.

The code you posted doesn't look to me as though it has any significant
errors. Personally, I wouldn't define buffer sizes in terms of
left-shifts, and I'd spell the word "receive" correctly, but neither of
those issues should be a direct problem here. :)

Pete

Lloyd Dupont

6/17/2008 11:21:00 PM

0

Thanks for correcting me on Receive, I hought it was the contrary (Recieve)
for a long time now!
Other than that I like to define size as left shift, a matter of habit I
suppose.

In fact it was my bug and a strange "Vista issue".

As soon I thought of trying my program as an administrator, it threw an
error which show me the problem:
sock.Bind() should be called prior to sock.RecieveFrom()

As to why it fails silently on Vista when ran as user, it is a mystery!


"Peter Duniho" <NpOeStPeAdM@nnowslpianmk.com> wrote in message
news:op.ucwflyt08jd0ej@petes-computer.local...
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 07:33:00 -0700, Lloyd Dupont <ld@galador.removeme.net>
> wrote:
>
>> I think Vista might be the culprit....
>> Anyway, could anyone share with me how to send some data over UDP and
>> recieve it?
>> Now it's not working, and I have no clue if it's the sending or
>> recieving or both which fails....
>
> Usually it's a firewall or NAT router issue. The first step is to test
> the code on a single machine (both sending and receiving), to eliminate
> the possibility of a router causing issues (though you may still have to
> deal with it later). Vista and XP SP2 both come with a firewall that's
> enabled by default. Though, I was under the impression that Vista would
> prompt you if it detected a need to change the firewall settings based on
> what the code's doing.
>
> The code you posted doesn't look to me as though it has any significant
> errors. Personally, I wouldn't define buffer sizes in terms of
> left-shifts, and I'd spell the word "receive" correctly, but neither of
> those issues should be a direct problem here. :)
>
> Pete