I am actually working in a project SDN(Software Defined Networking) Based Project using python on linux(Ubuntu). Which actually works as a packet traffic monitor. All this work is shown on the cmd without GUI. I want a GUI in which we can see the animation of traffic like flow , or time delay , number of send or received packets.
Just need some help to do this.
this is related to networking engineering or Net Centric Programming.
I work with a project like do you want. We software is divided in backend and frontend. Backend runs an Openflow Controller that create and manage rules. We capture statistics of the rules and send to frontend application that shows this statistics in graphs. You can share the stats with frontend through Json or something like this. The Frontend Application can be developed in html/css/JavaScript.
Related
We're creating an application to extract images from document where we'd be using MVC dot net for UI and job that extracts images and learn is in python. Here python batch would be on server and we're not sure whether MVC interaction with that batch would be possible directly or no. If not then I was thinking of WCF. But would like to explore other options as well which might be efficient. So, can Python batch have duplex communication with MVC dot net UI? If not which are the options to establish this?
Thanks
Since your jobs will probably be long running, the best way would probably be to use some form of messaging (eg. RabbitMQ, Apache Kafka). A possible outline
add to MVC a tread/process listening to a messaging queue
An image is added to MVC (or some other action happens, for which python should be notified)
MVC sends a message to the python server.
python learning system is notified, and updates its knowledge
When done, it sends a message to back MVC, containing whatever results you need
The actual image could be passed from MVC to python
either as binary data, inside the message itself
or, written to a commonly accessed database, and the message to python contains just a notification (eg, the filename of the added image)
If you go with the shared database, make sure that MVC only writes and python only reads, otherwise you might face inconsistencies.
I want to implement a peer-to-peer video chat feature for a web application I am currently developing. After doing my research, I've decided that using webRTC's Javascript APIs is the way to go. The application uses AngularJS in the front end and Ruby on Rails in the back end. The main issue I'm encountering while conceptualizing this application is linking the front end with the backend, and creating and maintaining the connection between user streams.
For the signaling aspect of the network, I want to utilize ActionController::Live and the Ruby gem em-event source to push live messages from the server to users and indicate which of their connections are online. Then, when they are ready to make a connection, they will create a custom room and the URL will be sent to the user that they wish to connect with, creating their offer. Once the user clicks on the link sent to them, they send back their answer. When the user responds, the ICE candidate process will begin for each of the users. Do you think that this is a sufficient signaling channel to set up the PeerConnection? What other major players am I missing?
From the research that I have done about WebRTC's RTCPeerConnection, once the initial connection is set up, and both users have public IP addresses corresponding to their stream, the connection is sustained through RTCPeerConnection, more specifically getPeerConnection(). Am I wrong? Are there other factors that I am not considering?
WebRTC makes the process of creating MediaStreams very simple with their getUserMedia method. Once these streams are created they can be added to the RTCPeerConnection that was established. Both as local and remote streams.
If you have any other suggestions for me, please let me know. I want to create this feature using webRTC, it seems like so much fun
There are certainly many ways to handle the call signaling so I'm not going to comment specifically on your approach. I will say that if you plan on supporting ICE trickling the ICE candidates will start flowing very early in the process so you really need an open signalling channel between your peers almost immediately when trying to connect to a peer.
We developed our solution for WebSphere on top of MQTT which is an open, and very simple pub/sub protocol. You can use any open MQTT broker with the protocol and there are a number of open source components available to make WebRTC development extremely easy including an AngularJS WebRTC module (angular-rtcomm), a core pure JavaScript module and much more. We also released a simple JSON based protocol as part of this open source solution. You can take a look at the signaling protocol. You can also read more details about the overall solution here (www.wasdev.net/webrtc). Here you'll find the base JavaScript libraries as well as a number of open source sample solutions. All of these can be forked on github.
In general you want to build your signaling on a protocol that will allow you to grow over time. It should work well for the web and mobile apps. From our experience it took a lot of time to get all this to work well and our goal was to not only support peer-to-peer calls but to support using media resources like Dialogic's XMS PowerMedia server on the backend for multiway support, record/playback and more. We also needed to support federation via SIP trunking so we wanted to make sure the protocol could be easily translated to SIP signaling while also supporting transcoding between media protocols like VP8 and H.264.
Note that if you're looking to only support peer-to-peer calling between WebRTC clients you can do that with these rtcomm open source components only, including an open MQTT broker and save yourself a ton of time. You can literally get something up and running in a matter of hours. The developer version of the WebSphere Liberty beta with the new rtcomm-1.0 service enabled also includes a built in MQTT broker and supports the open WebRTC signaling protocol linked above. You can use WebSphere for development and deploy a single server of this in production for free. You can also use Ruby on Rails with Liberty as well if you'd like.
Even if you decide not to use Liberty you can use all the open source components along with something like Mosquito (which is an open source MQTT broker) to get a solution off the ground quickly. There are also a number of MQTT clients available for many different programming languages including JavaScript, Java, etc. Check out https://eclipse.org/paho/. If you decide to build you're own signaling protocol you might still find these open source components helpful to see how we approached integration with the WebRTC PeerConnection.
I am wanting to know what would be the best way to expose a library via zeromq. Say, I install a machine learning library (mll) on one machine, and I have a zeromq broker running on another. Now, if I have a zeromq client which needs to call functions within the mll, how can it do so via the broker.
I am wanting to know the steps I will need to take to make this work for libraries in a generic way.
Basically you need to have a "listener" that picks up data from ZMQ and feeds it to your machine-learning backend code, then transmits the results back to the requestor.
There are a lot of design choices to be made, such as what format to use to serialize data between client and server (JSON? YAML? Pickle? Thrift? ...) , and how to encode requests and request options. But all things considered, this is a pretty straightforward ZMQ usage.
The problem comes when you want a more feature-rich, complete, robust, etc. design--things like multi-threaded or multi-process servers, multi-machine scalability, secure user / request authentication and authorization, job reporting and dashboard, or job checkpointing. All those "extras" are common "network job scheduler" or "(enterprise) message broker" functions that tend to come out-of-the-box with packages like Celery or RQ.
If you don't want to go the full "message broker middleware" route, you might start by examining others' designs for lightweight ZMQ-based job brokers, such as this one from Jeff Knupp.
I have a Raspberry PI that is tightly coupled with a device that I want to control.
The desired setup I want to have would look something like this:
The physical device with interactive hardware controls on the device (speaker, mic, buttons)
A Raspberry PI coupled to the device
On the PI:
A daemon app that reacts to changes from the hardware
A Webinterface that shows the current state of the device and allows to configure the device
The system should somehow be able to update itself with new software when it becomes available (apg-get or some other mechnism).
For the Webinterface I am going to use a rails app, which is not a problem as such. What is not clear to me is the event-driven software that is talking to the hardware through gpio. Firstly, I would prefer to do this using ruby, so that I don't have a big technology gap when developing the solution.
How can I ensure that both apps start up and run in the background when the raspberry PI starts
How do I notify the webapp of an event (e.g. a button was pressed).
I wonder if it makes sense that the two pieces of software have a shared database to communicate.
How to best setup some auto-update-mechanism for both pieces of software without requiring the user to take any actions.
Apps
This will be dependent on the operating system
If you install a lightweight version of Linux, you might be able to create some runtime applications or something. I've never done anything like this; but I know from Windows you can create startup programs -- likewise, you should be able to do something similar in Linux
BTW you wouldn't "run" the Rails app - you'll fire up the server to capture any requests. You'd basically run your app locally in "production" mode - allowing you to send requests, either through localhost, or setup a pseudo domain in the HOSTS file of your box
--
Web App
The web app itself is RESTful, meaning (I believe), it will only act upon having requests sent to it. Because this works over the HTTP protocol, it essentially means you'll need some sort of (web) service to send requests to the web app:
Representational state transfer (REST) is a way to create, read,
update or delete information on a server using simple HTTP calls
Although I've never done this myself, I would use the ruby app on your PI to send HTTP requests to your Rails app. This will certainly add a level of complexity, but will ensure you an interface the two types of data-transfer
The difference you have is Rails / any other web app will only act on request. "Native" applications will run as long as the operating system is operating; meaning you can "listen" for updates from the hardware etc.
What I would do is split the functionality:
Hardware input > send to service
Service > sends to Rails
Rails > sends response to service
Service > processes response
This may seem inefficient, but I think it's the best way to capture local-based input from your hardware. You'll have to use a localhost rails app, running with something like nginx or some other efficient server
--
Database
it would only make sense if they shared the data. You should remember that a database is different than a datatable. A database stores many tables, and is generally meant for a single purpose; whilst a datatable stores a single type of data.
From what you've written, I would recommend using two databases running on the same db server. This will give you the ability to create as many tables as you want for these databases - giving you scope to add as many different pieces of data you wish to each. Sharing data can be done using an API or a web service
--
Updating
Rails app will not need to be "updated" - you'll just need to deploy a fresh version. The beauty of Internet-centric software :)
In terms of your Rasberry-PI "on-board" software update - I don't have much experience with this, so can only recommend
Obviously there are multiple steps and phases of implementing such a thing.
I was thinking I would eventually have a webserver that takes http json requests from the ios app, and then queries the cassandra backend and sends results back. I could load balance and all that fancy stuff still, and also provide a logical layer on server side, and keep the client app lightweight.
I'm not sure i understand how cassandra clients fit though. It seems like the cassandra objective c client could eliminate the need for the above approach.
I saw another question and answer but it wasnt clear, perhaps because it varys on the need.
An iPhone app should not directly connect to a Cassandra backend or any other DB store.
First of all, talking to a database often requires adapting a very specific binary protocol (for Cassandra in particular, binary CQL or Thrift). Writing an adapter that would let your Objective-C app communicate in this binary protocol is a major piece of work, and could easily cost more than the rest of your app in effort. If you hide the DB behind a web-server, however, you will be able to select from a variety of existing adapters available in different server-side languages, meaning that you don't need to redo all that low-level work. You'll only be responsible for a relatively small piece of server-side code that would translate your REST queries and forward them to one of the Cassandra adapters (which expose easy-to-use interfaces).
Secondly, if you wanted to connect to a remote database from the phone, your database server would have to open its ports to the internet at large, which is a very bad security practice, even if you use SSL and user credentials. Again, if you hide behind a web server, you will be putting in a layer of technology that has evolved for decades to remain secure on the public internet.
Finally, having your phone talk to Cassandra directly is a poor architectural pattern. When you write apps that communicate on the internet, you want them to know as little as possible about each other, only how to talk to each other (preferably in a standard protocol). That way you can replace or upgrade individual components while keeping everything else the same. This may not sound like a lot, but is actually the main reason why phones, or web browsers, don't directly talk to databases. (If this setup were a good idea in principle, the first two problems could be easily solved given enough engineering effort.)
The approach you first suggested with JSON and the web server is the only correct way to go.
Use something like RESTful API, there are many reasons for that.
if your servers ip addresses change you have to update all client, if you add more nodes you will need to update all clients, if you decide to upgrade your cassandra and some functions change your clients will break and you need to update all clients.