I don't understand what it means to bind a socket to any address other than 127.0.0.1 (or ::1, etc.).
Am I not -- by definition -- binding the socket to a port on my own machine.. which is localhost?
What sense does it make to bind or listen to another machine or IP address's port?
Conceptually, it just doesn't make sense to me!
(This has proven surprisingly hard to Google... possibly because I'm not Googling the right terms.)
Binding of a socket is done to address and port in order to receive data on this socket (most cases) or to use this address/port as the source of the data when sending data (for example used with data connections in FTP server).
Usually there are several interfaces on a specific machine, i.e. the pseudo-interface loopback where the machine can reach itself, ethernet, WLAN, VPN... . Each of these interfaces can have multiple IP addresses assigned. For example, loopback usually has 127.0.0.1 and with IPv6 also ::1, but you can assign others too. Ethernet or WLAN have the IP addresses on the local network, i.e. 172.16.0.34 or whatever.
If you bind a socket for receiving data to a specific address you can only receive data sent to this specific IP address. For example, if you bind to 127.0.0.1 you will be able to receive data from your own system but not from some other system on the local network, because they cannot send data to your 127.0.0.1: for one any data to 127.0.0.1 will be sent to their own 127.0.0.1 and second your 127.0.0.1 is an address on your internal loopback interface which is not reachable from outside.
You can also bind a socket to a catch-all address like 0.0.0.0 (Ipv4) and :: (Ipv6). In this case it is not bound to a specific IP address but will be able to receive data send to any IP address of the machine.
Related
I need to find out the local IP address on a very old platform which doesn't have getifaddrs(). Lots of people recommend to do this by creating a UDP socket, connect() it to a destination IP and then use getsockname() to find out the local IP address (see here)
Is there a way to make this work on systems that don't have Internet access? AFAIU, for UDP sockets connect() just sets the default destination address for the socket without actually establishing any connection. So can I just use some random destination IP with connect() because it doesn't connect immediately for UDP sockets anyway? I.e. can I just pass 8.8.8.8 as a dummy IP to connect() and getsockname() will still allow me to get the local IP address even if there is no Internet connection?
When a server want to create a socket, it will use a combination of its IP address and some well-known port, let us say 80. So, when a packet arrived, both the server IP and port 80 will be used to decide whether the packet goes to that socket or not.
The question is why do we need to check the IP address of the server, since the packet (aka datagram) passed the network layer check and was certainly destined for this server. In other words, the network layer will not pass the packet to transport layer if the destination IP is not the server IP, so why do we use the IP address in the socket?
And if a host (a client or a server) created multiple sockets (network processes) using both its IP and some port numbers, is there any case where the IP could be different in these sockets?
Thanks in advance!
Why do we need to check the IP address of the server, since the packet (aka datagram) passed the network layer?
The Data Link Layer uses Media Access Control (MAC) addresses to direct packets. When a packet arrives at your computer operating system (OS), it arrived either because the MAC address matched the hardware address or it was a broadcast (ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff).
Once the packet is received, your OS determines if it is destined for an IP address assigned to the computer. At this point, the OS has several options:
If the IP address matches an assigned IP, deliver to any waiting applications or reject the packet and handle any needed Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) required.
Should the IP not match an assigned, your OS checks if IP routing is enabled. Then either rejects the packet issuing any required reply or forwards the packet to the destination IP in the routing table by creating a new packet targeting the MAC address of the destination router.
If a host (a client or a server) created multiple sockets (network processes) using both its IP and some port numbers, is there any case where the IP could be different in these sockets?
If your OS assigns more than one IP address to an interface, all of those IP addresses would be available to be used. You can open sockets using any available IP (usually INADDR_ANY or similar). In a listening context, your port will be available to every IP address assigned. In a transmitting context, your IP will be set depending on the outbound interface.
For a client socket, I can use bind() to bind it to a specific source Ip address to select a specific interface. Or I can use connect() directly then it will pick the source ip based on routing table.
I wonder can I bind a client socket to an ip not belongs to any interfaces ? E.g.: I have two interfaces:
eth0 : ip0
eth1 : ip1
(1) If I bind the client socket to ip2. Is this feasible ?
(2) If (1) is feasible, assuming client socket sent packets thru eth0. Then I configure the iptables in this client host, to forward all incoming packets to ip0 (eth0). In this case, if there are packets sent back from server side with destination ip address is ip2 (assuming this packet will reach my client host). Will my client socket receive the packet ?
Thanks in advance.
I don't really understand your question, but here goes:
For client sockets, you typically want the the OS and its routing table to pick the best interface for you using any available port. In which case, you bind to INADDR_ANY (0) and port 0. Or don't explicitly call bind at at all. Just call connect() and it will do the right thing.
If you need the client connection to occur through a specific interface, then bind the socket to a specific IP address. And then the OS will attempt to use that interface for the subsequent connect call and all traffic after that.
Attempting to bind the socket to an IP that doesn't belong to a local interface is surely going to result in an error.
Not sure what you mean about the iptables stuff. Sounds dicey.
Please have a look at:
https://www.rsyslog.com/doc/v8-stable/configuration/modules/omfwd.html#ipfreebind
MAN:
https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/ip.7.html
IP_FREEBIND (since Linux 2.4)
If enabled, this boolean option allows binding to an IP
address that is nonlocal or does not (yet) exist. This
permits listening on a socket, without requiring the
underlying network interface or the specified dynamic IP
address to be up at the time that the application is
trying to bind to it. This option is the per-socket
equivalent of the ip_nonlocal_bind /proc interface
described below.
I need to accept only connections from particular client ip address at server side. Should not use acl. With help of socket strict bind at server side can i do?
Example:
client ip address: 1.1.1.1
server ip address: 1.1.1.2
At server side:
1. Open a socket
2. Bind socket with 1.1.1.1(client ip address) with port no.
Will i be allow to do the second step at server side? Any special options are there to do?
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Boobesh
You can only bind the server port to an ip address to specify the interface to use.
For example your server has two network interfaces, one connected to the internet and one to a configuration network. The webserver should maybe only listen on the internet interface and a management tool only listen on the configuration network.
For your purpose you can accept the connection, compare the ip address and if it is not in the list of allowed clients close the connection immediately (or after sending an error message).
The other solution would be to use a firewall that is configured to allow only connections from the specified clients to the server port.
I agree with the friend above, u can only manage the ip and port in you server, but not client. u should compare the coming socket with the one u store in your server.
Before 'listen'ing on a socket I must first bind it to an address. Why? It seems to me that I shouldn't have to pick and should just listen to that port on all addresses. Even if I bind to 127.0.0.1 though, it seems I can still connect to that socket from a remote machine. What does binding to an address really do?
Binding to an address defines exactly which interface should have that server port open.
binding to 0.0.0.0 is a special case when you want to listen to all IP addresses know to the interface.
Binding specifically to 127.0.0.1 should make the server port visible only to code that can connect to the localhost (e.g. local processes).