<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style></style></head><body lang="DE" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="WordSection1">Unfortunately the test on the public network failed.Wireshark showed ICMP destination unreachable ( port unreachable ) right after the binding request to the gathered relay port.From timestamps there seems to be 8sec from the initial allocate XOR-RELAYED-ADDRESS response to this binding request, so maybe too long and the TURN server already closed the port ?The test topology is as below.STUN/TURN is same package just on different machines ( STUN+TURN) enabled.If the server on 10.. is configured in libnice STUN is possible and we can connect.If the server on 109.. is configured in libnice only TURN is possible but we can connect. <img width="515" height="325" id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image001.png@01D00286.369E94A0"> -----Original Message----- From: Klaus Kranz [mailto:<a href="mailto:klaus.kranz@access-company.com">klaus.kranz@access-company.com</a>] Sent: Montag, 17. November 2014 12:08 To: 'Olivier Crête'; '<a href="mailto:nice@lists.freedesktop.org">nice@lists.freedesktop.org</a>' Subject: RE: [libnice] [nice] recommended OSS STUN/TURN server I've been using nice_agent_set_relay_info(.... , NICE_RELAY_TYPE_TURN_UDP) in previous tests, that failed to connect.Now I changed experimentally to NICE_RELAY_TYPE_TURN_TCP and bingo the peers can connect now by STUN method.Test on public IP address will show finally if it can connect as well when only TURN is possible.Need to wait for our sysadmins, so this test might be conducted today afternoon. Xing fingers. But I frankly speaking I don't understand that behavior at all. I wonder if I am the only candidate on earth experiencing those problems.RgdsKlaus -----Original Message-----From: Klaus Kranz [<a href="mailto:klaus.kranz@access-company.com">mailto:klaus.kranz@access-company.com</a>]Sent: Montag, 17. November 2014 11:10To: 'Olivier Crête'; '<a href="mailto:nice@lists.freedesktop.org">nice@lists.freedesktop.org</a>'Subject: RE: [libnice] [nice] recommended OSS STUN/TURN server Dear Olivier,I commented the line on the other peer and it turns out that now listing the relay candidate on both sides, prevents them to finally connect using STUN.This is what I observed last week using the other turnserver.So back to zero.RgdsKlaus -----Original Message-----From: Klaus Kranz [<a href="mailto:klaus.kranz@access-company.com">mailto:klaus.kranz@access-company.com</a>]Sent: Montag, 17. November 2014 10:38To: 'Olivier Crête'; '<a href="mailto:nice@lists.freedesktop.org">nice@lists.freedesktop.org</a>'Subject: RE: [libnice] [nice] recommended OSS STUN/TURN server Dear Olivier,I've now tried with the rfc5466-turn-server running with --no-auth for simplicity gives same results ( no relay candidate ).However libnice debug showed that I have to use --fingerprint on the server side.But this was not enough. I still got "STUN auth error: No message integrity attribute!" from stunagent.c stun_agent_validate().After commenting the line return STUN_VALIDATION_UNAUTHORIZED it succeeds.Nice agent compatibility is set to RFC5245 Wireshark doesn't show such a status code. Only one is "role conflict"Test conducted in house on 10... with Peer clients behind 2 routers 192.... , so STUN able.Now I need to run the server on the public to see if the relay works. ( I'll keep you posted ). RgdsKlaus -----Original Message-----From: Olivier Crête [<a href="mailto:olivier.crete@collabora.com">mailto:olivier.crete@collabora.com</a>]Sent: Freitag, 14. November 2014 17:33To: Klaus Kranz; <a href="mailto:nice@lists.freedesktop.org">nice@lists.freedesktop.org</a>Subject: Re: [libnice] [nice] recommended OSS STUN/TURN server Hi, I've never tried coTurn, you may want to look at the libnice log produce with G_MESSAGES_DEBUG=all NICE_DEBUG=all, if you can't make any sense from them, please post them here. Olivier On 11/14/2014 10:22 AM, Klaus Kranz wrote:> Dear Olivier,> thanks a lot. I've followed the rfc5466-turn-server which leads to coTurn.> So I tried coTurn. It worked out-of-the-box for STUN but libnice > didn't gather relay candidates.> I could see that the TURN ALLOCATIONS went ok, but...> > Do you have any idea what can go wrong ?> Rgds> Klaus> > > -----Original Message-----> From: nice [<a href="mailto:nice-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org">mailto:nice-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org</a>] On Behalf Of > Olivier Crête> Sent: Donnerstag, 13. November 2014 17:59> To: <a href="mailto:nice@lists.freedesktop.org">nice@lists.freedesktop.org</a>> Subject: Re: [libnice] [nice] recommended OSS STUN/TURN server> > Hi,> > There are 2 good open source turn servers, <a href="http://turnserver.org">turnserver.org</a> and > rfc5466-turn-server.> > On 13/11/14 03:13 AM, Klaus Kranz wrote:>> Dear all,>> >> does somebody have a recommendation for an open source STUN/TURN >> server, confirming a well functioning behaviour.>> >> Thanks in advance.>> >> Rgds>> >> Klaus>> >> >> .>> >> >> _______________________________________________>> nice mailing list>> <a href="mailto:nice@lists.freedesktop.org">nice@lists.freedesktop.org</a>>> <a href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nice">http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nice</a>>> > > --> Olivier Crête> <a href="mailto:olivier.crete@collabora.com">olivier.crete@collabora.com</a>> _______________________________________________> nice mailing list> <a href="mailto:nice@lists.freedesktop.org">nice@lists.freedesktop.org</a>> <a href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nice">http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nice</a>> --Olivier Crête<a href="mailto:olivier.crete@collabora.com">olivier.crete@collabora.com</a></div></body></html> .