multicast

I have to implement a multicast receiver able to join a list of multicast groups and process received data in a specific thread using boost. I did try the following code..... boost::asio::io_service m_io_service; boost::asio::ip::udp::socket m_multicast_socket(m_io_service); // listen address boost::asio::ip::address listen_address = boost::asio::ip::address::from_string("0.0.0.0"); // listen port unsigned short multicast_port = m_configuration->m_multicast_interface_port; boost::asio::ip::udp::endpoint listen_endpoint( listen_address, multicast_port ); // open socket m_multicast_socket.open(

It looks like from my testing I am hitting a performance wall on my 10gb network. I seem to be unable to read more than 180-200k packets per second. Looking at perfmon, or task manager I can receive up to a million packets / second if not more. Testing 1 socket or 10 or 100, doesn't seem to change this limit of 200-300k packets a second. I've fiddled with RSS and the like without success. Unicast vs multicast doesn't seem to matter, overlapped i/o vs synchronous doesn't make a difference either. Size of packet doesn't matter either. There just seems to be a hard limit to the number of packets

The task I am trying to achieve is actually quite simple (multicast the string "TEST" to a userland daemon), but the kernel module doesn't compile. It stops with the error: passing argument 4 of ‘genlmsg_multicast_allns’ makes integer from pointer without a cast [enabled by default] But shouldn't it just be the multicast group I defined? Here is the code for "clarification": #include <linux/module.h> #include <net/sock.h> #include <linux/netlink.h> #include <linux/skbuff.h> #include <linux/string.h> #include <net/netlink.h> #include <net/genetlink.h> struct sock *nl_sk = NULL; static void

I am implementing a messaging system using C++ and Qt. After much thought, I have determined that multicasting or a multicast-style technique will work best to solve my problem. However, I have learned about UDP's unreliability and believe it to be unacceptable. My requirements are as follows: Messages are to be sent in a binary serialized form. From any given node on the network, I must be able to send messages to the other nodes. Message delivery must be insured. I have heard of OpenPGM and NORM as alternatives for UDP. If anyone has experience with either of these, could you please share? I

I am receiving ~3000 UDP packets per second, each of them having a size of ~200bytes. I wrote a java application which listens to those UDP packets and just writes the data to a file. Then the server sends 15000 messages with previously specified rate. After writing to the file it contains only ~3500 messages. Using wireshark I confirmed that all 15000 messages were received by my network interface. After that I tried changing the buffer size of the socket (which was initially 8496bytes): (java.net.MulticastSocket)socket.setReceiveBufferSize(32*1024); That change increased the number of

I have several embedded machines listening and streaming rtp audio data to a multicast group. They are connected to a smart managed switch (Netgear GS108Ev2) which does basic igmp snooping and multicast filtering on its ports, so that the rest of my (W)LAN doesn't get flooded. At start everything works fine for about 500-520 seconds. After that, they don't receive any more data until they leave and join the group again. I guess the switch is "forgetting" about the join after a timeout. Is there any way to refresh the group membership, i.e. letting the switch know, that there ist still someone

I have gotten a good start on my program, my first REAL Erlang program. I have it listening for messages, reading them and parsing them. I also have it sending them. The one little thing that is bothering me is I can't SEND on Port 5353, I have tried everything. All the other applications on my machine can listen AND send on port 5353, SubEthaEdit, iTunes, iChat. The solution MUST broadcast send on port 5353 and here is why. " If the source UDP port in a received Multicast DNS Query is not port 5353, this indicates that the client originating the query is a simple client that does not fully