What is 1. and 8. and why they are using the same Connection name? Why it is required or what does it convey?
What are these two cards i.e. 2,3 and why they are required? Can't we have single of these?
What and why are these two UserId i.e. 4,5? When are are going to use them? Can't we have single of these?
Again Business network i.e. 6,7. What and why first is NONE and Second is tutorial-network?
Why 13. is not enabled and 14. is enabled.
What is the use of redundant network with same application deployed on two Organisation?
Source:
Deploying a Hyperledger Composer blockchain business network to Hyperledger Fabric (multiple organizations)
https://hyperledger.github.io/composer/latest/tutorials/deploy-to-fabric-multi-org
Playground is showing you all the cards in your card store that you used when going through the byfn tutorial. You have acted as 2 different organisations on a single machine (however in the real world you are only likely to have cards for a single organisation). Also Playground can have issues working with a multi-organisation fabric network, such as byfn, around deploying/updating business networks, so it's use with these fabrics is not recommended.
1) Connection Profiles in a network card represent the fabric you want to communicate with. Connection profiles have a name and it is this name that you are seeing. You have 2 sections with the same name because with BYFN you are pretending to be 2 organisations on the same machine and the connection profiles are different between the 2 organisations but have the same name.
2,3) The first card represents a fabric network card and has the name PeerAdmin (used for doing fabric level interaction such as deploying a business network) The second card represents a business network card for interacting with the business network as the userid shown. They are 2 different cards that provide different types of access.
4) A fabric network card doesn't connect to a business network, this is why it shows NONE. The other one is the name of the business network that the card will connect you to.
5) 13 is not enabled because a fabric network card can never connect to a business network, whereas 14, because it is a business network card can connect to a business network.
6) don't understand the question.
Related
I'm doing some network research, I want to find all the IoT devices (or at least devices that could be IoT) from .pcap files. Do IoT devices have some unique traffic characteristics, traffic pattern or identification (eg. protocols, ports, etc)? I can't find the answer. IoT devices are relatively new so there is not that much documentation about it.
Thanks!
This is an active area of research and may require some sort of ML algorithm. We (3 students at UC Berkeley) are also looking into it. Do you have any pcaps you can share?
There are many characteristics, but because this is a new field with insufficient standardization - there is no solution to find all devices, and you will have to use several different methods.
Watch the protocol - some devices use niche protocols that single them out (like SIP for VOIP devices)
Watch the urls devices are looking for via DNS - since most iot devices are not directly human controlled like normal computers, their communication is rather unique per device. They will contact the site of their vendors for updates, send and receive data that directly relates to their function and won't have much variance in their behavior.
Watch for service discovery protocols. Many protocols include the service that the device gives as field. Read about ssdp and mdns.
There are many more complex ways of using the fact that most of the communication is pre-defined. Devices have unique patterns of communication - like specific times between requests for example.
There really isn't. It's an internet device after all, and the manufacturer and the user through configuration will define its traffic pattern.
That said, there will be a traffic pattern for a particular type of IoT devices. Sine IoT devices always phones home for legit reasons, you can probably find your device types by the servers they connect to, and use that to refine your statistics/ML algorithm.
Now on a tangent, a lot of IoT devices (medical devices, OnStar, Tesla and etc) use cellular networks, both for mobility and for reliability. There are a set of protocols that show a lot more information.
I am currently experimenting setting up an MVNO - I have the SIMs provided by my host network (from a reseller) and they work as expected on Android devices, but iOS devices considers my SIMs as the host network's ones, and installs their profile.
The issue is that some features (personal hotspot) are restricted on their profile based on their customer-facing terms and conditions, which do not apply to me as I am billed for data by the megabyte and am free to use it as I wish. Some critical features like VoLTE, WiFi Calling and visual voicemail do not work at all as I can't tell the device to use my servers instead of the host carrier's.
I've tried contacting Apple Developer support who referred me to an irrelevant support article, and there's zero public documentation about this. I've also gotten in touch with wwwmarcom#apple.com but have yet to receive any reply and it's been 3 days. The reseller can't help and the host network themselves probably wouldn't care unless this is a million-dollar deal which obviously it isn't (at least not yet).
I recently have been very interested in developing iOS apps (for iPhone specifically) that can "communicate" with nearby (geographically) apps.
My networking skills/resources are limited, so I was really hoping to make it a peer to peer app, avoiding the need to host my own server.
It seems like I have a few options, including the newish Multi-peer Connectivity framework, and Location services.
I was hoping someone who has experience writing peer to peer apps could direct me to what they think the most logical approach would be.
Additonal info:
*I am only looking to send text/small pictures (speed is not a priority)
*Detecting nearby (within a mile or so) geographically is the main goal
*Possibly communicate with Android devices (I know multi-peer connectivity lacks this)
Peer-to-peer communication is limited to a range of about 50 meters. To extend the range you can create a mesh using intermediate peers to relay messages. That is how the Firechat app works.
If you want to communicate over greater distances without a mesh I believe you will need to go via the cloud
In terms of communicating with Android, the people who made FireChat are coming out with their SDK. Not sure how/what pricing will be but I assume they will offer this cross platform function. There are of course other ways but I am not that advanced in app development to know them yet.
For a simple chat app there are many free online tutorials that help you create iphone to iphone chat app that can also send images. Range will be limited however to whatever is max for WiFi. Like Keith said, mesh is another option but I believe everyone in the network has to have the app for the data to bounce.
I have a scenario of two P2P groups ,each with one AP-client pair.They are independent P2P groups.I am curious to know what will happen if the two P2P groups come close to each other?
TLDR;
The groups will not effect each other.
The WiFi Direct specifications states that devices must be in the FIND phase in order to find more peers to connect to, and even if they were, they wouldn't try to connect unless they were running an app that told them to disconnect from their current group and connect to a new group if they find one.
Two group owner devices can connect to each other if that feature is supported in the particular implementation of Wi-Fi Direct on the devices you are using, and if it supported by the Wi-Fi chip on those devices. According to this paper, it's possible for a device to be a group owner in one group, and a client in another group by time-sharing the Wi-Fi interface:
In order to act both as P2P Client and as P2P GO the laptop will
typically alternate between the two roles by time-sharing the Wi-Fi
interface.
On the other hand, it is impossible to have a group with two group owners. The Wi-Fi direct groups will still be separate from each other, there will simply be a group owner in one that is a client in the other.
According to this article
Some of the capabilities, such as concurrent P2P group and AP
connections, will add complexity to product designs at both the IC and
Wi-Fi subsystem levels. A product will have to maintain multiple MAC
entities to support concurrent operations and most likely will require
concurrent communications on multiple Wi-Fi channels. Clearly the
feature will be valuable, but will it be worth the extra cost required
to implement it? That’s up to the designer to decide. Over time, the
market use, or not, of those features will make that decision easier.
So as far as I understood basic mode is single p2p group per device and since device bound to one group it will not jump in immediately to another group.
Android Classes Reference can be find here
Attempt of implementation can be found here
if device supports more then 1 group it will registered by 2nd group manager as available peer and then any member of group can TRY to connect to device. Device should have some WPS like security or for mobile phone popup dialog.
More on security from Wikipedia:
Wi-Fi Direct essentially embeds a software access point ("Soft AP"),
into any device that must support Direct.[9] The soft AP provides a
version of Wi-Fi Protected Setup with its push-button or PIN-based
setup.
When a device enters the range of the Wi-Fi Direct host, it can
connect to it, and then gather setup information using a Protected
Setup-style transfer.[9] Connection and setup is so simplified that
some suggest it may replace Bluetooth in some situations.[12]
Soft APs can be as simple or as complex as the role requires. A
digital picture frame might provide only the most basic services
needed to allow digital cameras to connect and upload images. A smart
phone that allows data tethering might run a more complex soft AP that
adds the ability to bridge to the Internet. The standard also includes
WPA2 security and features to control access within corporate
networks.[9] Wi-Fi Direct-certified devices can connect one-to-one or
one-to-many and not all connected products need to be Wi-Fi
Direct-certified. One Wi-Fi Direct enabled device can connect to
legacy Wi-Fi certified devices.
The Wi-Fi Direct certification program is developed and administered
by the Wi-Fi Alliance, the industry group that owns the "Wi-Fi"
trademark. The specification is available for purchase from the Wi-Fi
Alliance.[13]
I have to iphone applications that they use two different networks. Changing network setting for each application is not user friendly. I want to do such thing as follows,
When application starts, it checks the availability of particular network (SSID) and popup a message to the user to permit to connect. Once user click on "OK" they it connect to that particular network.
Anybody has similar experience ?
How can I connect to given SSID using objectiveC ?
I've been reading for a solution to achieve app controlled networking, but it seems impossible without the use of Apple80211 private API.
The best i think you can do is with CaptiveNetwork.
With this you can register a list of SSID's for your device and it will suppress web sheet.
From the doc:
By calling the CNSetSupportedSSIDs function, an application can register a list of wireless network SSIDs with Captive Network Support, thereby assuming responsibility for authenticating with those networks. Typically when a user joins a captive network, Captive Network Support provides a web sheet that allows the user to authenticate with the network. If an application has registered the SSID of the captive network, however, the web sheet is suppressed, and the user can complete authentication in the appropriate application.