I want to check when the internet goes off can i capture that event .I am not getting the proper API or any example which would explain the same .
I am using socket for (TCP)communication and I open a socket when the network is available. I have observed that the socket does not give any exception in case the network goes off.
If any one had done or any example links would be really helpful Thanks in advance
The problem is that no event 'network down' exists in tcp connections, they just go down.
As suggested by Jerome you should check if timeout is reached.
Of course if network goes down you won't receive packets neither be able to send them so the underlying InputStream and OutputStream will throw an IOException but just when they'll realize that network is not working properly (usually 2*rtt = 120 seconds, it depends how TCP layer is managed).
Look state diagram by yourself:
What typically happens is that when in ESTABLISHED your socket will send data over the socket while waiting for ACK from destination. ACK won't come since network went off so your socket's window fills up and socket starts resending packets until real timeout intervenes throwing the exception.
Another case is when network goes off and your socket realizes that it cannot write anymore on channel: it will throw an exception imediately upon calling outStream.write(...).
It's not that easy to tell whether the network is off or just slow.
If you set Timeouts, it will throw exception if it takes too long:
For sockets:
socket.setSoTimeout(CONNECTION_TIMEOUT);
For HttpURLConnections:
HttpURLConnection con = (HttpURLConnection)url.openConnection();
con.setConnectTimeout(CONNECTION_TIMEOUT);
con.setReadTimeout(CONNECTION_TIMEOUT);
TCP is designed to be quiet when idle. There is no administrative packets on wire when there is no pending packet. If the connection is dead while idle, you will not know, no matter what the setting of the timeout is. It does have keepalives but it's pretty much useless at the recommended frequency of 2 hours and longer.
You need to build some heartbeat or keepalive in your application protocol to detect stale connections. Keepalive is nothing but a noop packet sent at regular interval to trigger TCP timeout when connection is down. In my app, I do this every 10 seconds.
Why don't you try pinging www.google.com
See http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/nio/example/Ping.java
Related
I have a java application which manages several socket connections to devices. I have no control over the protocol which these devices implement, and now I want my java application to send heartbeats for each device. The devices do not send data, but only respond to commands.
The javadoc for InputStream.read() states that if the end of stream is reached, it will return -1. So that seems like a reasonable way to check if the connection is open. But when I implement this solution, there are no bytes available (since the device only responds to commands), and since the connection is open, it will hang at the read call forever. Example, I peek at one byte and if that would be -1 the heartbeat would be "unhealthy":
public static void main(final String[] args) throws IOException {
try (Socket socket = new Socket()) {
socket.connect(new InetSocketAddress("192.168.30.99", 25901), 1000);
System.out.println("Connected");
final BufferedInputStream bis = new BufferedInputStream(socket.getInputStream());
bis.mark(1);
System.out.println(bis.read()); // Stalls forever here
bis.reset();
System.out.println("Done");
}
}
Is it reasonable to say that, if no byte is received within x milliseconds, the device is connected?
Is there any surefire way to check socket connectivity without heartbeats where the ip and port is important?
Is there any surefire way to check socket connectivity without
heartbeats where the ip and port is important?
No, you can't reliably know if the other end is alive unless you try to communicate with it.
If the other end doesn't have a no-op ping function, you're pretty much out of luck. Waiting in a blocking read() call won't help you if the connection gets cut off.
Is it reasonable to say that, if no byte is received within x
milliseconds, the device is connected?
No. It means that the device hasn't sent anything in x milliseconds. Which is normal, as it only responds to commands.
when the other end of socket do not write any byte and wait to read from socket first, blocking on read is the default behavior.
with no control over the protocol , little can be done.
it is reasonable to say, successful connect is a weaker heartbeat.
you don't have to wait for x miliseconds which makes no difference on such protocol
another tricky way , you can try to send a few bytes that most unlikely being a valid command,
for example the '\0' or '\n' ,
hoping that it will do no harm to the device and the device can close socket actively on such invalid command.
when the other end closes socket actively , read call on such socket should return -1
the better heartbeat way always have something to do with the protocol,
as the no-op ping command suggested by #Kayaman
Maybe TCP level keep-alive is solution for you:
You can turn it on by using command:
socket.setKeepAlive(true);
It sets SO_KEEPALIVE socket option. Quote from SocketOptions java-API:
When the keepalive option is set for a TCP socket and no data has been
exchanged across the socket in either direction for 2 hours (NOTE: the
actual value is implementation dependent), TCP automatically sends a
keepalive probe to the peer. This probe is a TCP segment to which the
peer must respond. One of three responses is expected: 1. The peer
responds with the expected ACK. The application is not notified (since
everything is OK). TCP will send another probe following another 2
hours of inactivity. 2. The peer responds with an RST, which tells the
local TCP that the peer host has crashed and rebooted. The socket is
closed. 3. There is no response from the peer. The socket is closed.
The purpose of this option is to detect if the peer host crashes.
Valid only for TCP socket: SocketImpl
You could also use SO_TIMEOUT by using:
socket.setSoTimeout(timeout);
Enable/disable SO_TIMEOUT with the specified timeout, in milliseconds.
With this option set to a non-zero timeout, a read() call on the
InputStream associated with this Socket will block for only this
amount of time. If the timeout expires, a
java.net.SocketTimeoutException is raised, though the Socket is still
valid. The option must be enabled prior to entering the blocking
operation to have effect. The timeout must be > 0. A timeout of zero
is interpreted as an infinite timeout.
Call those right after connect() or accept() calls, before the program enters to
'no control of underlying protocl' -state.
I am writing a program that has a Java Server/Client socket. There will be many messages sent back and forth, and in some situations, sending a message to the server and waiting for a period of time until the server has sent back a "execute" message.
Here is what I have planned:
1 Server (machine could possibly have antivirus security on it)
3 Clients (with room for more clients in future)
Parallel and Interleaved synchronization being carried out on the server side based up the clients output to the server.
When all machines are ready (in sync), when parallel all clients will be sent an "execute" message, when interleave clients will be sent an "execute" command in sequential order 1 by 1
I have started to build the program to have this setup above, and once a message is received on the server, the servers performs actions based upon the input and then sends back a message to the client. I have had problems in the past where messages were not sent or received properly, so my question is:
Do I keep the socket alive until then end of my program?
Or do I keep the socket open only until a successful transmission (a full handshake) has taken place and then close the socket? Leaving the client to connect again next time it wants to send a message.
You should certainly keep TCP connections open for as long as possible, but be prepared to create a new one on failure. You will need to use read timeouts at both ends to detect those.
Q: Should I open a new socket each connection, or keep it around and re-use it for subsequent connections?
A: "It depends".
I would encourage you to "Keep it Simple" and simply open new socket as needed ... until you find that you need otherwise.
By all means: keep the socket open for as long as you reasonably expect a "dialog" between your client and server. Don't force the client to establish a new connection if he's likely to want to talk again reasonably quickly.
Finally, take a look at these links regarding "Connection Pooling":
http://www.javacodegeeks.com/2013/08/simple-and-lightweight-pool-implementation.html
http://tutorials.jenkov.com/java-multithreaded-servers/thread-pooled-server.html
Whether or not you close the socket after a message depends on the protocol that you use between the server and the clients. Probably you define this yourself.
What is probably more important, is that you are able to serve multiple clients in parallel. Therefore, you need to start a separate thread for every client that requests a connection.
Personally, I made some applications with socket communication. To prevent keeping resources for too long when they are not used, but also not closing and reopening constantly when a connection is heavily used, I added a connection supervisor. This is yet another thread, that does is started when a connection is opened, and just performs a countdown from a predefined value (e.g. countdown from 60, decreqsing the value every second for a supervision time of 1 minute). When the counter reaches zero, order to close the socket, and terminate that particular thread.
When a socket is open, and receives a new message, then reset the supervision counter, so the socket will remain open, as long as the time between messages is less than 1 minute.
I have an as3 serversocket, we are connecting to the this serversocket via java socket(an android app). The problem is that, when serversocket application force closed, i couldnt find the a way to understand that remote socket is closed or unreachable, except when trying to flush() a message to that socket throws broken pipe error. The reason that i want to solve this problem in another way is not to make server application busy with connection check messages ?
A TCP connection is not a continuous flow like a river. It's a sequence of segments sent at discrete times - thus is more like cars on a road. So there is no way to be notified if the road is broken, until a car tries to reach the other end, fails, and calls you back.
You should simply keep sending cars at reasonable intervals (30 seconds?), thus instructing your server to do nothing when it receives a NOOP message (short for No Operation). The client will be programmed to start sending NOOP when the connection is idle (no message sent or received for 30 seconds), and when the driver calls back that he can't reach his destination, you close the current socket and attempt to create another one.
There are 3 ways for TCP to understand that connection has been closed:
One side got an error - it sends a Reset request to the other side to close the connection
One side actually wants to close the connection so it sends a FIN message to the other side
A time-out when trying to transmit something from one side to another. This time-out can only happen when a tcp-package is sent. After a connection has been made , tcp's packages are only sent on a data transmitting request (and connection closing request...).
So if one side disconnects suddenly, not in middle of data transmitting, there is no way of spotting a disconnection , but to send some package once a while.
You've found the only way. TCP doesn't provide any way of checking the state of a connection other than trying to use it. You can use this more intelligently, for example you can send yourself heartbeat messages and so forth. But there is no API that will tell you.
What you can do is let the server broadcast a I am alive message every 5/10 mins :)
We have a simple client server architecture between our mobile device and our server both written in Java. An extremely simple ServerSocket and Socket implementation. However one problem is that when the client terminates abruptly (without closing the socket properly) the server does not know that it is disconnected. Furthermore, the server can continue to write to this socket without getting any exceptions. Why?
According to documentation Java sockets should throw exceptions if you try to write to a socket that is not reachable on the other end!
The connection will eventually be timed out by Retransmit Timeout (RTO). However, the RTO is calculated using a complicated algorithm based on network latency (RTT), see this RFC,
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2988.txt
So on a mobile network, this can be minutes. Wait 10 minutes to see if you can get a timeout.
The solution to this kind of problem is to add a heart-beat in your own application protocol and tear down connection when you don't get ACK for the heartbeat.
The key word here (without closing the socket properly).
Sockets should always be acquired and disposed of in this way:
final Socket socket = ...; // connect code
try
{
use( socket ); // use socket
}
finally
{
socket.close( ); // dispose
}
Even with this precautions you should specify application timeouts, specific to your protocol.
My experience had shown, that unfortunately you cannot use any of the Socket timeout functionality reliably ( e.g. there is no timeout for write operations and even read operations may, sometimes, hang forever ).
That's why you need a watchdog thread that enforces your application timeouts and disposes of sockets that have been unresponsive for a while.
One convenient way of doing this is by initializing Socket and ServerSocket through corresponding channels in java.nio. The main advantage of such sockets is that they are Interruptible, that way you can simply interrupt the thread that does socket protocol and be sure that socket is properly disposed off.
Notice that you should enforce application timeouts on both sides, as it is only a matter of time and bad luck when you may experience unresponsive sockets.
TCP/IP communications can be very strange. TCP will retry for quite a while at the bottom layers of the stack without ever letting the upper layers know that anything happened.
I would fully expect that after some time period (30 seconds to a few minutes) you should see an error, but I haven't tested this I'm just going off how TCP apps tend to work.
You might be able to tighten the TCP specs (retry, timeout, etc) but again, haven't messed with it much.
Also, it may be that I'm totally wrong and the implementation of Java you are using is just flaky.
To answer the first part of the question (about not knowing that the client has disconnected abruptly), in TCP, you can't know whether a connection has ended until you try to use it.
The notion of guaranteed delivery in TCP is quite subtle: delivery isn't actually guaranteed to the application at the other end (it depends on what guaranteed means really). Section 2.6 of RFC 793 (TCP) gives more details on this topic. This thread on the Restlet-discuss list and this thread on the Linux kernel list might also be of interest.
For the second part (not detecting when you write to this socket), this is probably a question of buffer and timeout (as others have already suggested).
I am facing the same problem.
I think when you register the socket with a selector it doesn't throw any exception.
Are you using a selector with your socket?
My chat application connects to a server and information is sent/received by the user. When the connection changes, such as 3g->wifi, wifi->3g, losing a data connection, etc, the socket sometimes stays connected for ages before disconnecting. During this time, it's impossible to tell if the connection is still active, it seems as if messages are being sent just fine. Other times, when sending a message, it will throw an IO error and disconnect.
Apart from implementing code to detect connection changes and reconnecting appropriately, is it possible to have the socket immediately throw an IO exception when connectivity changes?
Edit: I'm connecting using the following code:
Socket sock = new Socket();
sock.connect(new InetSocketAddress(getAddress(), getPort())), getTimeout());
//get bufferedReader and read until BufferedReader#readLine() returns null
I'm not using setSoTimeout as data may not be transferred for long periods of time depending on the remote server's configuration.
Are you talking about a java.net.Socket connection? Then try setSoTimeout(). Otherwise specify how you're connecting.
This is an old problem that I've seen a few times before in the database world.
The solution I used there was to manage the connection at the application level. I'd explicitly send a no-op message of some sort (i.e. SELECT 1 WHERE FALSE) over the connection every so often as a ping, and if this failed I would tear down and re-establish the connection, possibly to a failover server if the original wasn't accepting connections.
As previous answers already pointed out, this is a common problem. Even after sending a custom "ping" it might need some time until the socket realizes that the underlying connection is broken. Plus, regular pings are quite energy-demanding using 3-4G mobile networks, due to their tail states. Don't do that!
What you can do, however, is requesting to get informed when the connectivity changes (last section), and close/reconnect the socket manually in the according broadcast receiver. (EDIT: I see you already found out about this; just keeping it here for completeness)