Develop Reference

How to communicate between two Unity apps with TCP?

Update
I figured out what the problem was. I was trying to move too much data over TCP, and it was causing freeze-ups. For some reason, this wasn't manifesting in the editor...who knows for what reason. If anyone else stumbles upon this problem (in a program like Unity, where functions are looping constantly and data is always being processed), consider that you're moving too much irrelevant data.
Original Post
I've run into quite the problem, and I'm hoping I can receive some guidance.
In short, I'm wondering how to use TCP to communicate two Unity apps over the same computer. I've gotten it functioning in editor, but when both apps are built, communication quickly breaks down.
This is really stumping me, because I don't understand why an app would work in the Editor environment, but not in the official build.
When I use TCP to communicate between two Unity apps (on the same computer), it works so long as one of them is kept in the Unity environment. That is, if I build one app, and open the other in the Unity editor, TCP communication works flawlessly.
Here is some more background: One of my apps is functioning as a User Interface, and the other is interfacing with a Looking Glass to provide a holographic display of in-game objects. Originally, they were combined into one App - but I had a lot of trouble getting Unity's multidisplay support to function between two monitors of different resolutions. Looking Glass factory even provides a prefab to do just this, but it is broken in the current SDK. So I have resorted to using sockets to interface between two apps, one for each monitor.
I'm using C#'s TCP listener class: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.net.sockets.tcplistener?view=netframework-4.8
And TCP client class: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.net.sockets.tcpclient?view=netframework-4.8
Presently, the UI is acting as the TCPListener, and the application that produces holograms is the TCPClient. Within each of these applications, I'm using two Queues - an IncomingMessages queue and an Outgoing Messages queue - which are global variables shared between the main thread and the networking thread.
TCP Listener:
private void Start()
{
incomingMessages = new Queue();
outgoingMessages = new Queue();
Application.runInBackground = true;
thread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(Receive));
thread.Start();
//stuff happens that's irrelevant to this question. And then...
}
void Receive()
{
TcpListener server = null;
try
{
// Set the TcpListener on port 13000.
Int32 port = 13000;
IPAddress localAddr = IPAddress.Parse("127.0.0.1");
// TcpListener server = new TcpListener(port);
server = new TcpListener(localAddr, port);
// Start listening for client requests.
server.Start();
// Buffer for reading data
Byte[] bytes = new Byte[256];
String data = null;
// Enter the listening loop.
Debug.Log("About to reenter main while in Server...");
while (threadContinue)
{
Debug.Log("Waiting for a connection... ");
// Perform a blocking call to accept requests.
// You could also user server.AcceptSocket() here.
TcpClient client = server.AcceptTcpClient();
Debug.Log("Connected!");
data = null;
// Get a stream object for reading and writing
NetworkStream stream = client.GetStream();
int i;
// Loop to receive all the data sent by the client.
while ((i = stream.Read(bytes, 0, bytes.Length)) != 0)
{
// Translate data bytes to a ASCII string.
data = System.Text.Encoding.ASCII.GetString(bytes, 0, i);
Debug.Log("Received from Client: " + data);
lock (this)
incomingMessages.Enqueue(data);
string response = supplyData();
byte[] msg = System.Text.Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(response);
// Send back a response.
stream.Write(msg, 0, msg.Length);
Debug.Log("Sent to Client: " + response);
}
// Shutdown and end connection
client.Close();
}
}
catch (SocketException e)
{
Debug.Log("SocketException: ");
Debug.Log(e);
}
finally
{
// Stop listening for new clients.
server.Stop();
}
Debug.Log("Exiting 'Receive'");
}
And here is the TCP Client. It attempts to connect a regular intervals, and also whenever new data is available. This is so that it can receive information from the server regularly and share new data whenever it is available:
void Start()
{
//prepare networking
Application.runInBackground = true;
outgoingMessages = new Queue();
incomingMessages = new Queue();
thread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(Connect));
thread.Start();
//stuff happens that's irrelevant to this question...
}
private void Connect()
{
String server = "127.0.0.1";
Int32 port = 13000;
string message = "";
while (threadContinue == true)
{
if (timeToConnect())
{
lastConnection = ourTime;
if (outgoingMessages.Count > 0)
message = outgoingMessages.Dequeue().ToString();
else
message = "Nothing to report.";
try
{
// Create a TcpClient.
// Note, for this client to work you need to have a TcpServer
// connected to the same address as specified by the server, port
// combination.
client = new TcpClient(server, port);
// Translate the passed message into ASCII and store it as a Byte array.
Byte[] data = System.Text.Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(message);
// Get a client stream for reading and writing.
// Stream stream = client.GetStream();
stream = client.GetStream();
// Send the message to the connected TcpServer.
stream.Write(data, 0, data.Length);
Debug.Log("Sent to Server: " + message);
// Buffer to store the response bytes.
data = new Byte[256];
// String to store the response ASCII representation.
String responseData = String.Empty;
// Read the first batch of the TcpServer response bytes.
Int32 bytes = stream.Read(data, 0, data.Length);
responseData = System.Text.Encoding.ASCII.GetString(data, 0, bytes);
lock (this)
incomingMessages.Enqueue(responseData);
Debug.Log("Received from Server: " + responseData);
stream.Close();
client.Close();
}
catch (ArgumentNullException e)
{
Debug.Log("ArgumentNullException: ");
Debug.Log(e);
outgoingMessages.Enqueue(message);
}
catch (SocketException e)
{
Debug.Log("SocketException: ");
Debug.Log(e);
outgoingMessages.Enqueue(message);
}
}
}
}
private bool timeToConnect()
{
if ((ourTime - lastConnection > NETWORK_DELAY) || (outgoingMessages.Count > 0))
return true;
return false;
}
Instantiated in separate threads so that Unity's main thread can continue unhindered.
Again - it works in Editor, but when I build it, it breaks.

Update
I figured out what the problem was. I was trying to move too much data over TCP, and it was causing freeze-ups. For some reason, this wasn't manifesting in the editor...just in the exported app. Who knows for what reason. If anyone else stumbles upon this problem...where you're bypassing Unity's multidisplay functionality by building multiple apps that communicate over network...consider that you're burdening your queues with too much data.

C# tcp async listener gets stuck on my on_receive callback after client closes socket

I've got a listener socket that accepts, receives and sends as a TCP server typically does. I've given my accept and receive code below, it's not that different from the example on Microsoft's documentation. The main difference is that my server doesn't kill a connection after it stops receiving data (I don't know if this is a bad design or not?).
private void on_accept(IAsyncResult xResult)
{
Socket listener = null;
Socket handler = null;
TStateObject state = null;
Task<int> consumer = null;
try
{
mxResetEvent.Set();
listener = (Socket)xResult.AsyncState;
handler = listener.EndAccept(xResult);
state = new TStateObject()
{
Socket = handler
};
consumer = async_input_consumer(state);
OnConnect?.Invoke(this, handler);
handler.BeginReceive(state.Buffer, 0, TStateObject.BufferSize, 0, new AsyncCallback(on_receive), state);
}
catch (SocketException se)
{
if (se.ErrorCode == 10054)
{
on_disconnect(state);
}
}
catch (ObjectDisposedException)
{
return;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
System.Console.WriteLine("Exception in TCPServer::AcceptCallback, exception: " + ex.Message);
}
}
private void on_receive(IAsyncResult xResult)
{
Socket handler = null;
TStateObject state = null;
try
{
state = xResult.AsyncState as TStateObject;
handler = state.Socket;
int bytesRead = handler.EndReceive(xResult);
UInt16 id = TClientRegistry.GetIdBySocket(handler);
TContext context = TClientRegistry.GetContext(id);
if (bytesRead > 0)
{
var buffer_data = new byte[bytesRead];
Array.Copy(state.Buffer, buffer_data, bytesRead);
state.BufferBlock.Post(buffer_data);
}
Array.Clear(state.Buffer, 0, state.Buffer.Length);
handler.BeginReceive(state.Buffer, 0, TStateObject.BufferSize, 0, new AsyncCallback(on_receive), state);
}
catch (SocketException se)
{
if(se.ErrorCode == 10054)
{
on_disconnect(state);
}
}
catch (ObjectDisposedException)
{
return;
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
System.Console.WriteLine("Exception in TCPServer::ReadCallback, exception: " + ex.Message);
}
}
This code is used to connect to an embedded device and works (mostly) fine. I was investigating a memory leak and trying to speed up the process a bit by replicating exactly what the device does (our connection speeds are in the realm of about 70kbps to our device, and it took an entire weekend of stress testing to get the memory leak to double the memory footprint of the server).
So I wrote a C# program to replicate the data transactions, but I've run into an issue where when I disconnect the test program, the server gets caught in a loop where it endlessly has its on_receive callback called. I was under the impression that BeginReceive wouldn't be triggered until something was received, and it seems to call on_receive, ends the receiving like an async callback should do, process the data, and then I want the connection to await more data so I call BeginReceive again.
The part of my test program where the issue occurs is in here:
private static void read_write_test()
{
mxConnection = new Socket(AddressFamily.InterNetwork, SocketType.Stream, ProtocolType.Tcp);
mxConnection.Connect("12.12.12.18", 10);
if (mxConnection.Connected)
{
byte[] data = Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes("HANDSHAKESTRING"); //Connect string
int len = data.Length;
mxConnection.Send(data);
data = new byte[4];
len = mxConnection.Receive(data);
if (len == 0 || data[0] != '1')
{
mxConnection.Disconnect(false);
return;
}
}
//Meat of the test goes here but isn't relevant
mxConnection.Shutdown(SocketShutdown.Both);
mxConnection.Close();
}
Up until the Shutdown(SocketShutdown.Both) call, everything works as expected. When I make that call however, it seems like the server never gets notification that the client has closed the socket and gets stuck in a loop of endlessly trying to receive. I've done my homework and I think I am closing my connection properly as per this discussion. I've messed around with the disconnect section to just do mxConnection.Disconnect(false) as well, but the same thing occurs.
When the device disconnects from the server, my server catches a SocketException with error code 10054, which documentation says:
Connection reset by peer.
An existing connection was forcibly closed
by the remote host. This normally results if the peer application on
the remote host is suddenly stopped, the host is rebooted, the host or
remote network interface is disabled, or the remote host uses a hard
close (see setsockopt for more information on the SO_LINGER option on
the remote socket). This error may also result if a connection was
broken due to keep-alive activity detecting a failure while one or
more operations are in progress. Operations that were in progress fail
with WSAENETRESET. Subsequent operations fail with WSAECONNRESET.
I've used this to handle the socket being closed and has worked well for the most part. However, with my C# test program, it doesn't seem like it works the same way.
Am I missing something here? I'd appreciate any input. Thanks.

The main difference is that my server doesn't kill a connection after it stops receiving data (I don't know if this is a bad design or not?).
Of course it is.
it seems like the server never gets notification that the client has closed the socket and gets stuck in a loop of endlessly trying to receive
The server does get notification. It's just that you ignore it. The notification is that your receive operation returns 0. When that happens, you just call BeginReceive() again. Which starts a new read operation. Which…returns 0! You just keep doing that over and over again.
When a receive operation returns 0, you're supposed to complete the graceful closure (with a call to Shutdown() and Close()) that the remote endpoint started. Do not try to receive again. You'll just keep getting the same result.
I strongly recommend you do more homework. A good place to start would be the Winsock Programmer's FAQ. It is a fairly old resource and doesn't address .NET at all. But for the most part, the things that novice network programmers are getting wrong in .NET are the same things that novice Winsock programmers were getting wrong twenty years ago. The document is still just as relevant today as it was then.
By the way, your client-side code has some issues as well. First, when the Connect() method returns successfully, the socket is connected. You don't have to check the Connected property (and in fact, should never have to check that property). Second, the Disconnect() method doesn't do anything useful. It's used when you want to re-use the underlying socket handle, but you should be disposing the Socket object here. Just use Shutdown() and Close(), per the usual socket API idioms. Third, any code that receives from a TCP socket must do that in a loop, and make use of the received byte-count value to determine what data has been read and whether enough has been read to do anything useful. TCP can return any positive number of bytes on a successful read, and it's your program's job to identify the start and end of any particular blocks of data that were sent.

You missed this in the documentation for EndReceive() and Receive():
If the remote host shuts down the Socket connection with the Shutdown method, and all available data has been received, the Receive method will complete immediately and return zero bytes.
When you read zero bytes, you still start another BeginReceive(), instead of shutting down:
if (bytesRead > 0)
{
var buffer_data = new byte[bytesRead];
Array.Copy(state.Buffer, buffer_data, bytesRead);
state.BufferBlock.Post(buffer_data);
}
Array.Clear(state.Buffer, 0, state.Buffer.Length);
handler.BeginReceive(state.Buffer, 0, TStateObject.BufferSize, 0, new AsyncCallback(on_receive), state);
Since you keep calling BeginReceive on a socket that's 'shutdown', you're going to keep getting callbacks to receive zero bytes.
Compare with the example from Microsoft in the documentation for EndReceive():
public static void Read_Callback(IAsyncResult ar){
StateObject so = (StateObject) ar.AsyncState;
Socket s = so.workSocket;
int read = s.EndReceive(ar);
if (read > 0) {
so.sb.Append(Encoding.ASCII.GetString(so.buffer, 0, read));
s.BeginReceive(so.buffer, 0, StateObject.BUFFER_SIZE, 0,
new AsyncCallback(Async_Send_Receive.Read_Callback), so);
}
else{
if (so.sb.Length > 1) {
//All of the data has been read, so displays it to the console
string strContent;
strContent = so.sb.ToString();
Console.WriteLine(String.Format("Read {0} byte from socket" +
"data = {1} ", strContent.Length, strContent));
}
s.Close();
}
}

C# socket thinks it's connected [duplicate]

How can I detect that a client has disconnected from my server?
I have the following code in my AcceptCallBack method
static Socket handler = null;
public static void AcceptCallback(IAsyncResult ar)
{
//Accept incoming connection
Socket listener = (Socket)ar.AsyncState;
handler = listener.EndAccept(ar);
}
I need to find a way to discover as soon as possible that the client has disconnected from the handler Socket.
I've tried:
handler.Available;
handler.Send(new byte[1], 0,
SocketFlags.None);
handler.Receive(new byte[1], 0,
SocketFlags.None);
The above approaches work when you are connecting to a server and want to detect when the server disconnects but they do not work when you are the server and want to detect client disconnection.
Any help will be appreciated.

Since there are no events available to signal when the socket is disconnected, you will have to poll it at a frequency that is acceptable to you.
Using this extension method, you can have a reliable method to detect if a socket is disconnected.
static class SocketExtensions
{
public static bool IsConnected(this Socket socket)
{
try
{
return !(socket.Poll(1, SelectMode.SelectRead) && socket.Available == 0);
}
catch (SocketException) { return false; }
}
}

Someone mentioned keepAlive capability of TCP Socket.
Here it is nicely described:
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/TCP-Keepalive-HOWTO/overview.html
I'm using it this way: after the socket is connected, I'm calling this function, which sets keepAlive on. The keepAliveTime parameter specifies the timeout, in milliseconds, with no activity until the first keep-alive packet is sent. The keepAliveInterval parameter specifies the interval, in milliseconds, between when successive keep-alive packets are sent if no acknowledgement is received.
void SetKeepAlive(bool on, uint keepAliveTime, uint keepAliveInterval)
{
int size = Marshal.SizeOf(new uint());
var inOptionValues = new byte[size * 3];
BitConverter.GetBytes((uint)(on ? 1 : 0)).CopyTo(inOptionValues, 0);
BitConverter.GetBytes((uint)keepAliveTime).CopyTo(inOptionValues, size);
BitConverter.GetBytes((uint)keepAliveInterval).CopyTo(inOptionValues, size * 2);
socket.IOControl(IOControlCode.KeepAliveValues, inOptionValues, null);
}
I'm also using asynchronous reading:
socket.BeginReceive(packet.dataBuffer, 0, 128,
SocketFlags.None, new AsyncCallback(OnDataReceived), packet);
And in callback, here is caught timeout SocketException, which raises when socket doesn't get ACK signal after keep-alive packet.
public void OnDataReceived(IAsyncResult asyn)
{
try
{
SocketPacket theSockId = (SocketPacket)asyn.AsyncState;
int iRx = socket.EndReceive(asyn);
}
catch (SocketException ex)
{
SocketExceptionCaught(ex);
}
}
This way, I'm able to safely detect disconnection between TCP client and server.

This is simply not possible. There is no physical connection between you and the server (except in the extremely rare case where you are connecting between two compuers with a loopback cable).
When the connection is closed gracefully, the other side is notified. But if the connection is disconnected some other way (say the users connection is dropped) then the server won't know until it times out (or tries to write to the connection and the ack times out). That's just the way TCP works and you have to live with it.
Therefore, "instantly" is unrealistic. The best you can do is within the timeout period, which depends on the platform the code is running on.
EDIT:
If you are only looking for graceful connections, then why not just send a "DISCONNECT" command to the server from your client?

"That's just the way TCP works and you have to live with it."
Yup, you're right. It's a fact of life I've come to realize. You will see the same behavior exhibited even in professional applications utilizing this protocol (and even others). I've even seen it occur in online games; you're buddy says "goodbye", and he appears to be online for another 1-2 minutes until the server "cleans house".
You can use the suggested methods here, or implement a "heartbeat", as also suggested. I choose the former. But if I did choose the latter, I'd simply have the server "ping" each client every so often with a single byte, and see if we have a timeout or no response. You could even use a background thread to achieve this with precise timing. Maybe even a combination could be implemented in some sort of options list (enum flags or something) if you're really worried about it. But it's no so big a deal to have a little delay in updating the server, as long as you DO update. It's the internet, and no one expects it to be magic! :)

Implementing heartbeat into your system might be a solution. This is only possible if both client and server are under your control. You can have a DateTime object keeping track of the time when the last bytes were received from the socket. And assume that the socket not responded over a certain interval are lost. This will only work if you have heartbeat/custom keep alive implemented.

I've found quite useful, another workaround for that!
If you use asynchronous methods for reading data from the network socket (I mean, use BeginReceive - EndReceive methods), whenever a connection is terminated; one of these situations appear: Either a message is sent with no data (you can see it with Socket.Available - even though BeginReceive is triggered, its value will be zero) or Socket.Connected value becomes false in this call (don't try to use EndReceive then).
I'm posting the function I used, I think you can see what I meant from it better:
private void OnRecieve(IAsyncResult parameter)
{
Socket sock = (Socket)parameter.AsyncState;
if(!sock.Connected || sock.Available == 0)
{
// Connection is terminated, either by force or willingly
return;
}
sock.EndReceive(parameter);
sock.BeginReceive(..., ... , ... , ..., new AsyncCallback(OnRecieve), sock);
// To handle further commands sent by client.
// "..." zones might change in your code.
}

This worked for me, the key is you need a separate thread to analyze the socket state with polling. doing it in the same thread as the socket fails detection.
//open or receive a server socket - TODO your code here
socket = new Socket(....);
//enable the keep alive so we can detect closure
socket.SetSocketOption(SocketOptionLevel.Socket, SocketOptionName.KeepAlive, true);
//create a thread that checks every 5 seconds if the socket is still connected. TODO add your thread starting code
void MonitorSocketsForClosureWorker() {
DateTime nextCheckTime = DateTime.Now.AddSeconds(5);
while (!exitSystem) {
if (nextCheckTime < DateTime.Now) {
try {
if (socket!=null) {
if(socket.Poll(5000, SelectMode.SelectRead) && socket.Available == 0) {
//socket not connected, close it if it's still running
socket.Close();
socket = null;
} else {
//socket still connected
}
}
} catch {
socket.Close();
} finally {
nextCheckTime = DateTime.Now.AddSeconds(5);
}
}
Thread.Sleep(1000);
}
}

The example code here
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.net.sockets.socket.connected.aspx
shows how to determine whether the Socket is still connected without sending any data.
If you called Socket.BeginReceive() on the server program and then the client closed the connection "gracefully", your receive callback will be called and EndReceive() will return 0 bytes. These 0 bytes mean that the client "may" have disconnected. You can then use the technique shown in the MSDN example code to determine for sure whether the connection was closed.

Expanding on comments by mbargiel and mycelo on the accepted answer, the following can be used with a non-blocking socket on the server end to inform whether the client has shut down.
This approach does not suffer the race condition that affects the Poll method in the accepted answer.
// Determines whether the remote end has called Shutdown
public bool HasRemoteEndShutDown
{
get
{
try
{
int bytesRead = socket.Receive(new byte[1], SocketFlags.Peek);
if (bytesRead == 0)
return true;
}
catch
{
// For a non-blocking socket, a SocketException with
// code 10035 (WSAEWOULDBLOCK) indicates no data available.
}
return false;
}
}
The approach is based on the fact that the Socket.Receive method returns zero immediately after the remote end shuts down its socket and we've read all of the data from it. From Socket.Receive documentation:
If the remote host shuts down the Socket connection with the Shutdown method, and all available data has been received, the Receive method will complete immediately and return zero bytes.
If you are in non-blocking mode, and there is no data available in the protocol stack buffer, the Receive method will complete immediately and throw a SocketException.
The second point explains the need for the try-catch.
Use of the SocketFlags.Peek flag leaves any received data untouched for a separate receive mechanism to read.
The above will work with a blocking socket as well, but be aware that the code will block on the Receive call (until data is received or the receive timeout elapses, again resulting in a SocketException).

Above answers can be summarized as follow :
Socket.Connected properity determine socket state depend on last read or receive state so it can't detect current disconnection state until you manually close the connection or remote end gracefully close of socket (shutdown).
So we can use the function below to check connection state:
bool IsConnected(Socket socket)
{
try
{
if (socket == null) return false;
return !((socket.Poll(5000, SelectMode.SelectRead) && socket.Available == 0) || !socket.Connected);
}
catch (SocketException)
{
return false;
}
//the above code is short exp to :
/* try
{
bool state1 = socket.Poll(5000, SelectMode.SelectRead);
bool state2 = (socket.Available == 0);
if ((state1 && state2) || !socket.Connected)
return false;
else
return true;
}
catch (SocketException)
{
return false;
}
*/
}
Also the above check need to care about poll respone time(block time)
Also as said by Microsoft Documents : this poll method "can't detect proplems like a broken netwrok cable or that remote host was shut down ungracefuuly".
also as said above there is race condition between socket.poll and socket.avaiable which may give false disconnect.
The best way as said by Microsoft Documents is to attempt to send or recive data to detect these kinds of errors as MS docs said.
The below code is from Microsoft Documents :
// This is how you can determine whether a socket is still connected.
bool IsConnected(Socket client)
{
bool blockingState = client.Blocking; //save socket blocking state.
bool isConnected = true;
try
{
byte [] tmp = new byte[1];
client.Blocking = false;
client.Send(tmp, 0, 0); //make a nonblocking, zero-byte Send call (dummy)
//Console.WriteLine("Connected!");
}
catch (SocketException e)
{
// 10035 == WSAEWOULDBLOCK
if (e.NativeErrorCode.Equals(10035))
{
//Console.WriteLine("Still Connected, but the Send would block");
}
else
{
//Console.WriteLine("Disconnected: error code {0}!", e.NativeErrorCode);
isConnected = false;
}
}
finally
{
client.Blocking = blockingState;
}
//Console.WriteLine("Connected: {0}", client.Connected);
return isConnected ;
}
//and heres comments from microsoft docs*
The socket.Connected property gets the connection state of the Socket as of the last I/O operation. When it returns false, the Socket was either never connected, or is no longer connected. 
Connected is not thread-safe; it may return true after an operation is aborted when the Socket is disconnected from another thread.
The value of the Connected property reflects the state of the connection as of the most recent operation.
If you need to determine the current state of the connection, make a nonblocking, zero-byte Send call. If the call returns successfully or throws a WAEWOULDBLOCK error code (10035), then the socket is still connected; //otherwise, the socket is no longer connected .

Can't you just use Select?
Use select on a connected socket. If the select returns with your socket as Ready but the subsequent Receive returns 0 bytes that means the client disconnected the connection. AFAIK, that is the fastest way to determine if the client disconnected.
I do not know C# so just ignore if my solution does not fit in C# (C# does provide select though) or if I had misunderstood the context.

Using the method SetSocketOption, you will be able to set KeepAlive that will let you know whenever a Socket gets disconnected
Socket _connectedSocket = this._sSocketEscucha.EndAccept(asyn);
_connectedSocket.SetSocketOption(SocketOptionLevel.Socket, SocketOptionName.KeepAlive, 1);
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/1011kecd(v=VS.90).aspx
Hope it helps!
Ramiro Rinaldi

i had same problem , try this :
void client_handler(Socket client) // set 'KeepAlive' true
{
while (true)
{
try
{
if (client.Connected)
{
}
else
{ // client disconnected
break;
}
}
catch (Exception)
{
client.Poll(4000, SelectMode.SelectRead);// try to get state
}
}
}

This is in VB, but it seems to work well for me. It looks for a 0 byte return like the previous post.
Private Sub RecData(ByVal AR As IAsyncResult)
Dim Socket As Socket = AR.AsyncState
If Socket.Connected = False And Socket.Available = False Then
Debug.Print("Detected Disconnected Socket - " + Socket.RemoteEndPoint.ToString)
Exit Sub
End If
Dim BytesRead As Int32 = Socket.EndReceive(AR)
If BytesRead = 0 Then
Debug.Print("Detected Disconnected Socket - Bytes Read = 0 - " + Socket.RemoteEndPoint.ToString)
UpdateText("Client " + Socket.RemoteEndPoint.ToString + " has disconnected from Server.")
Socket.Close()
Exit Sub
End If
Dim msg As String = System.Text.ASCIIEncoding.ASCII.GetString(ByteData)
Erase ByteData
ReDim ByteData(1024)
ClientSocket.BeginReceive(ByteData, 0, ByteData.Length, SocketFlags.None, New AsyncCallback(AddressOf RecData), ClientSocket)
UpdateText(msg)
End Sub

You can also check the .IsConnected property of the socket if you were to poll.

Bind multiple listener to the same port

I am using UdpClient class in .net 3.5
I need to bind multiple applications to the same port .
So, if UDP servers broadcast any request - all the applications thats listen on the port can receive the message but the problem is, when I try bind to an application to the same port, only one application receive the message and the other does not.
Below is some sample code for the two application:
UdpClient udpClient = new UdpClient();
Thread thread;
IPEndPoint endPoint = new IPEndPoint(IPAddress.Loopback, 11000);
public Form1()
{
//CheckForIllegalCrossThreadCalls = false;
InitializeComponent();
udpClient.ExclusiveAddressUse = false;
udpClient.Client.SetSocketOption(
SocketOptionLevel.Socket, SocketOptionName.ReuseAddress, true);
udpClient.Client.Bind(endPoint);
}
private void MainForm_KeyDown(object sender, KeyEventArgs e)
{
if (e.KeyCode == Keys.Escape)
{
thread.Abort();
udpClient.Close();
Close();
}
}
private void ReceiveMessage()
{
//while (true)
//{
// IPEndPoint remoteIPEndPoint = new IPEndPoint(IPAddress.Any, 11000);
// byte[] content = udpClient.Receive(ref endPoint);
udpClient.BeginReceive(new AsyncCallback(Read_Callback), null);
//if (content.Length > 0)
//{
// string message = Encoding.ASCII.GetString(content);
// this.Invoke(myDelegate, new object[] { message });
//}
// }
}
public void Read_Callback(IAsyncResult ar)
{
try
{
byte[] buffer = udpClient.EndReceive(ar, ref endPoint);
// Process buffer
string s = Encoding.ASCII.GetString(buffer);
// richTextBox1.Text = s;
udpClient.BeginReceive(new AsyncCallback(Read_Callback), null);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{ }
}
PS : I am unable to figure out the reason or am I missing something. ?

That's the nature of sockets. Even in cases (such as UDP) where multiple applications can access the same port, the data is handed out first-come, first-serve. UDP is also designed with minimum overhead, so there isn't even an opportunity to "check the queue," like you (hypothetically) could with TCP.
It's designed around having multiple processes share a server load, alternating who receives the request based on who's idle.
You'd need to build something external to get around this, like a retransmission protocol or a database to make sure every inbound message is shared.
If you can deal with the changes, a smarter way to handle this would be UDP Multicast, where multiple programs essentially enroll to receive group messages. In that case, the single-port restriction can (and should) be abandoned.

Socket stops receiving after X messages

I have a .NET Socket that listens to all TCP requests on the computer, and aggregates them into HTTP requests (where possible).
I have the following problem -
When I access a site (for example - stackoverflow.com) I see in WireShark that there are X (lets say - 12) TCP packets received from the site's host.
But in my code the Socket just stops receiving the messages before the end (after 10 messages)
I have no idea how to fix this, I hope it's something that is limiting the socket in his definition
Here is my code:
public void StartCapturing()
{
try
{
_chosenOutgoingAddress = UserChoosesIpCtrl();
_socket = new Socket(AddressFamily.InterNetwork, SocketType.Raw,
ProtocolType.IP);
_socket.Bind(new IPEndPoint(_chosenOutgoingAddress, 0));
_socket.SetSocketOption(SocketOptionLevel.IP,
SocketOptionName.HeaderIncluded, true);
_socket.IOControl(IOControlCode.ReceiveAll, _bIn, _bOut);
thrStartCapturing = new Thread(StartReceiving);
thrStartCapturing.Name = "Capture Thread";
thrStartCapturing.Start();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
//TODO: general exception handler
throw ex;
}
}
The StartCapturing method will initiate the Socket and start the receiving thread with the StartReceiving method (as below0
private void StartReceiving()
{
while (!_stopCapturing)
{
int size = _socket.ReceiveBufferSize;
int bytesReceived = _socket.Receive(_bBuffer,
0,
_bBuffer.Length,
SocketFlags.None);
if (bytesReceived > 0)
{
_decPackagesReceived++;
ConvertReceivedData(_bBuffer, bytesReceived);
}
Array.Clear(_bBuffer, 0, _bBuffer.Length);
}
}
What am I doing wrong?

Ok, I figured it out, so I'm posting here for anyone else who might need it in the future
The .NET Socket class has a property ReceiveBufferSize which determines what is the buffer that the Socket will allow.
My problem was that my code wasn't ASync, or fast enough to clean this buffer, so that the last TCP packets had no more buffer and were ignored.
Increasing the ReceiveBufferSize or make my code ASync (probably better :-)) will fix this.