DJanGo wrote:
> @d6jg; dont mix Multicast with udp !
> since all stupid AllinoneIPdevices aka "router" uses native vlan [vlan
> 1] that "udp cut off" would never be possible even with seperate
> "routers"...
> And that is not the case.
I am not.
AFAIK UDP packets are not sent outside of the
@d6jg; dont mix Multicast with udp !
since all stupid AllinoneIPdevices aka "router" uses native vlan [vlan
1] that "udp cut off" would never be possible even with seperate
"routers"...
And that is not the case.
DJanGo's
DJanGo wrote:
> Vlans means you need a single switch (or more) where all cables are
> plugged into ths device but this device does "virtual" seperate some of
> these into one or another (or more) LANs.
> Thats one more step
> But if you use two different Networks like 10.0.0.0/25 (subnetmask
>
baggins wrote:
> Sorry to confuse you, I may have a wrong idea about VLANS...
> I thought that VLANS were something that could be implemented on managed
> switches regardless of the physical wiring.
AFAIK That is what VLANS should do but actual functionality can depend
on the router and network
I have to say I am confused
@baggins
You suggested you might use VLAN which requires segregated cabling yet
you then say that your cabling wont support the 2 x Router idea?
VB2.4[/B] STORAGE *QNAP TS419P (NFS)
[B]Living Room* - Joggler & SB3 -> Onkyo TS606 -> Celestion F20s
*Office* -
baggins wrote:
> Upon rebooting the lot, clearing all caches, disabling both UPnP
> plugins, now only client-B is visible in both the Default and Material
> skin!
no idea what this means.
> Unfortunately now there is a problem with Philippe's UPnP Plugin as it
> cannot generate a configuration
Hm, I was unaware that there were in fact two UPnP plugins of which one
is enabled by default.
Now, the machine on which run both virtual machines that I use, crashed.
Upon rebooting the lot, clearing all caches, disabling both UPnP
plugins, now only client-B is visible in both the Default and
bpa wrote:
> Which UPNP plugin ?
> There are two plugin which deal with UPNP - Logitech's and Philppe's -
> are both disabled ? After disable LMS will need to be restarted to take
> effect.
The Logitech one is actually listed as being Andy Grussman's
VB2.4[/B] STORAGE *QNAP TS419P (NFS)
baggins wrote:
> I'm running this on Fedora 28.
>
> I cleared the cache and disabled the function of one LMS looking for
> others. Unfortunately no change in behaviour.
> The only thing that may be positive is the fact that with the Material
> skin, only the client that is setup to connect to
This is what I am suggesting
26297
It requires the cabling to LMS2 and Clients to be entirely separate from
network 1
+---+
|Filename: 2routerconfig.jpg|
|Download:
baggins wrote:
> Sorry for the silly question, but how do I clear the LMS cache? I looked
> at all tabs in Settings but could not find that...:o
Not sure what OS your LMS use.
If running Linux or OSX - then it is case of stopping LMS and deleting
the cache.* files in the LMS Cache directory
bpa wrote:
> Clearing LMS cache is probably more effective then browser cache as LMS
> knows what is happening on the net not the browser. LMS probably caches
> knowledge of players.
> I expect for UDP block to be effective it has to be on both LMS as LMS
> can share info.
>
> I can't answer
baggins wrote:
> I'm afraid having two routers with double NAT is not an option due to
> constraints from my ISP...
>
> In the mean time I did the following test which leaves me somewhat
> confused:
>
> I disabled port 3483 both tcp and udp on the second server that runs
> LMS-B and restarted
baggins wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
> I did another test as follows:
> Disabled 3483 UDP on LMS-B, restarted LMS-B.
> Cleared browser cache.
> Accessed LMS-B with the Default interface: all players visible.
> Accessed LMS-B with the Material interface: only client-B visible.
>
>
bpa wrote:
> 3483 UDP is ONLY used for the broadcast packet at the start. So when it
> is blocked at LMS end - Players will not find LMS and LMS will not find
> players.
> 3483 TCP is essential for the communication it is used for slimproto
> between player and LMS.
Thanks for the
baggins wrote:
> Enabling port 3483 udp has no effect.
> Only after enabling 3483 tcp is client-B found on the 'Material'
> interface and client-B also shows up on the Default interface...
3483 UDP is ONLY used for the broadcast packet at the start. So when it
is blocked at LMS end - Players
d6jg wrote:
> VLANs may work but there are reports of UDP traffic jumping across them
> - I think it is hardware vendor specific as to whether it blocks or
> not.
>
> However what should work would be segregated routers i.e.
>
> 1. Router 1 that connects to Internet and serves one part of
baggins wrote:
> Will give that a try tomorrow.
VLANs may work but there are reports of UDP traffic jumping across them
- I think it is hardware vendor specific as to whether it blocks or
not.
However what should work would be segregated routers i.e.
1. Router 1 that connects to Internet
bpa wrote:
> Does this still happen if you block UDP broadcast as that the broadcast
> is what informs the server what players exist on the LAN ?
Will give that a try tomorrow.
baggins's Profile:
baggins wrote:
> That is actually what I see on the second server: when I choose a player
> that is connected to the other one, there is a popup asking if I want to
> switch the player to the current one.
Does this still happen if you block UDP broadcast as that the broadcast
is what informs
bpa wrote:
> You could block servers receiving UDP Broadcast on port 3483. It will
> stop the inital discovery and not affect playback once player know the
> IP address of the desired server. However I think there may be
> additional message which enable transfer of players between servers so
baggins wrote:
> How can I make this work?
You could block servers receiving UDP Broadcast on port 3483. It will
stop the inital discovery and not affect playback once player know the
IP address of the desired server. However I think there may be
additional message which enable transfer of
DJanGo wrote:
> i dont know the reason why you want to do this
> but if your using /25 subnet instead of /24 you only lost two ip
> Adresses and you end up in two networks with two seperate broadcast
> adresses.
I dont think that will completely block the players from being visible.
I have
i dont know the reason why you want to do this
but if your using /25 subnet instead of /24 you only lost two ip
Adresses and you end up in two networks with two seperate broadcast
adresses.
DJanGo's Profile:
24 matches
Mail list logo
