View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0011123 | MMW v4 | DLNA/UPnP | public | 2013-07-31 22:47 | 2013-08-17 00:09 |
| Reporter | peke | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | urgent | Severity | major | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | closed | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Fixed in Version | 4.1 | ||||
| Summary | 0011123: UPnP connection issues | ||||
| Description | Looks like in recent updates MMA can't find MMW Servers for ether UPnP or Select Sync Server it involves all three of My devices using MMW 1651 and MMA 152/153 Symptoms are: 1. Nexus 7 (JB 4.3) and Sony Tipo (ICS 4.0.4) see only first listed MMW server on port 57833 (Screenshot supplied) 2. LG L5 (ICS 4.0.3) Do not see MMW servers at all All three Devices can access PC using ES File explorer and see that PC have UPnP service port Open. LOgs from nexus and LG Uploaded, along with MMW server listing and FING Services Scan. Note: "153 log.txt" is From LG prior to Installing 152 for second log | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Fixed in build | 1653 | ||||
|
|
Peke, I just tested on ICS, JB 4.1, and JB 4.3 with MMW build 1651 running on two different servers, and in all three cases, I was able to browse both servers either via UPnP or via select sync server. I suspect that this might not be an MMA regression, but that something in your environment is causing this issue. You can confirm by verifying if _any_ MMA builds can successfully browse both servers in your current network environment. btw, can other Android UPnP browsers access both servers (afaik, ES Explorer uses Samba and not UPnP)? |
|
|
All other browsers See both Servers. I have noticed that in case MMW server port is 5000 and WMP was started than port 5000 stays closed. We should be able to test if port is open and ensure that MMW has control over port. If you change port to 50000 than MMA UPnP see both servers. I Uploaded new LOG files, Screen Shots and XML descriptions of both servers to see if maybe issue is in MMW. To Stay up to date I retested it again with 155 and end Result is that UPnP list both servers but when selecting Sync Server MMA only see first one. |
|
|
There are some notes that we should take into consideration: 1) sometimes refresh of upnp servers is not so fast and you it is even possible that you have to wait for it even one minute. I observe it too sometimes on my network. This was already discussed with Ludek, but we don't have a log of this situation because it is so rare. And usually it happen after long using of MMW. So when you test other UPnP clients please do it at the same time as MMA (or in short time) when circumstances are the same. 2) in "Select sync server", we don't show all servers - only sync servers. I don't know exact implementation on MMW side now but I filter it on MMA side by model name. Model name has to be "MediaMonkey Sync Server". Could you please send me your upnp servers descriptions located at http://192.168.0.1:50000/DeviceDescription.xml and http://192.168.0.1:57833/DeviceDescription.xml ? There we can see the model name. Next time pls use "Send logs" from options and attach id here. These logs are better formatted. From your logs I saw that there was a problem with parsing of device storage configuration. I've fixed it and it will be in build 157. |
|
|
1. looks like port 5000 was actually occupied by Windows UPNP network Discovery as enabled here http://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch001367.htm So I changed to 50000 and from now on if shows instantly. Problem looks like on MMW side which doesn't check if Port is Open for usage 2. You are right, MMA filter it. Both XMLs are supplied on FTP and filed under this bug 57833 -> "03.08.2013 Peke Sync Server Logs.rar\1 DeviceDescription.xml" 50000 -> "03.08.2013 Peke Sync Server Logs.rar\2 DeviceDescription.xml" The problem with this is that User asked to be able to select which one will be used by which device and selectively Allow some devices to be able to access one of servers and others for example to different one. Example: a. Two Users that have set own collections (Set of Files), both have separate Sync Servers settings to avoid what will be seen and browsed (I have Two Servers set MY with full library listing, WIFES With only hers Collections, MMW Started As Service and Each User have GUI in MMW Set Accordingly. b. Two MMW servers set so that one is used for User Family devices,TVs and one for general Usage where anyone allowed to access WiFi will be able to see/sunc them (Auto Allow) without going thru each device and its share settings. c. On A party you stream tracks from MMW Library but only allow Party participants to access party played tracks Set as Second Server (I actually tried this) |
|
|
2. I went through the xmls and MMA filters it correctly. This was already discussed many times before and this solution was chosen as best. Please discuss with Ludek for more details. I assign this to Ludek because of 1. |
|
|
Re 1) This was because my hack - currently I use port 5000 for running invisible server. I need the server for "Play to" purposes when no server is running, in that case MM use this hidden server for serving local files (c:/ needs to be served as http://), but this server cannot be auto discovered. I fixed it in build 1653, the hidden server is started with random port from dynamic client port range (value between 49152 and 65535) like in case of all others newly created MM servers. Re 2) This was discussed in a greather details via email thread with Marek, Jiri and Rusty one year ago. The conclusion was to have only one main sync server that cannot be deleted and only this server can be used for WiFi sync. There was several reasons for this: - there is a single link to the sync server from the device config dialog (next to the '[x] Grant remote access...' checkbox) - there doesn't seem to be advantages to run more sync servers as everything is configured per device (independent from the server config) In Peke's example b) is one private family server and one public server configured to auto allow and would restrict the content that can be configured on sync-list in MMA (e.g. limited to only Music collection). In this case Peke is right that running more sync servers would be advantage. Tracked as new issue: 0011145 |
|
|
Plese move someone this issue from MMA -> MMW project (I don't have enough privilegies to do so) |
|
|
Verified 1653 |
