Here are more information: 1. Airport, means https://www.apple.com/tw/airport-extreme/ (This device) 2. 10.0.1.25 is LAN ip address under Airport. 192.168.3.10 is the WAN address of Airport. Of course, there has the other NAT device. (Multi-layer NAT) 3. No VM, no VPN here. 4. I also not hear any audio from my PC. 5. The other device is not FF. But if my PC is under LAN 192.168.3.x, FF works. However it works if I use WebRTC demo app on mobile device and put that mobile under Airport. The audio and video are perfectly displayed on my mobile device.
On Wednesday, November 12, 2014 3:18:58 AM UTC+8, Nils Ohlmeier wrote: > On 11/11/14 10:06 AM, Randell Jesup wrote: > > On 11/11/2014 11:45 AM, Byron Campen wrote: > >> Do you get audio? What implementation is the other side? If the > >> other > >> side is also Firefox, what does about:webrtc show there? What webrtc > >> service are you using? From an ICE perspective things look OK on your > >> end; > >> if peer reflexive works, it makes sense to avoid using a relay after > >> all. > >> Stuff can still fail after that though. > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I found a strange problem on my side. I have a PC under Airport WiFi AP > >>> (but connected by wire), and try to use RTCPeerConnection to connect > >>> the > >>> other device. However, the ice status is changed as "connected", but I > >>> can't see any video on my FF. I also try to use about:webrtc to find > >>> the > >>> any clue.. Here is the output from about:webrtc > > > > Airport and hotel wifi/routers/firewalls are often horribly draconian, > > and in particular often will not allow peer-to-peer (peer reflexive) > > operation for various reasons (starting with protecting users from > > other users with viruses who are behind the same firewall, and less > > 'nice' reasons as well). Now, this may not be your issue since it > > seems to have selected peer-reflexive and presumably that requires > > packets to pass between them. However: The network situation may also > > be odd since I see both 192.168.x.x and 10.x.x.x addresses in use. > > Multiple interfaces? layered NATs? > > > My first suspects for multiple private IPs for local candidates are VMs > of some kind. > > But what makes me suspicious is that two 192.168.x.x addresses got > selected and Aslan did not mention that the call is happening in a local > network. Is this maybe a call via VPN into the office or something like > that? > > Best > Nils _______________________________________________ dev-media mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-media
