CameronD wrote: 
> I presume you are directing this request to the OP Patja.  No versions
> of LMS work for me.

@CameronD - Sorry if I wasn't clear. I assumed you'd reply to my post as
you had mentioned wireshark 

> In terms of the server's reply to the broadcast discovery request, I
> have tracked back to the 5.0.1 code and it has never changed - it has
> -always -been 'D' followed by the hostname minus any domain parts, zero
> padded out to 18 bytes. The wiki entry describing IP address and port I
> suspect has always been wrong and wireshark just used it for
> dissection.
> 
> I have downloaded old Windows SlimServer versions 6.5.4 and 6.2.2 and
> tried them, on Windows 10 and a 32-bit WindowsXP VM. Running
> simultaneously or separately.  I can always see the expected response
> going out onto the LAN but the SB only ever reports "server not found".

My understanding is the SB1 used to work OK under 7.9.0 under Centos but
stopped working when you moved to Debian and a later version of LMS. Had
the Debian system new faster hardware compared to Centos ?
Since it was working with 7.9.0 - I think there is little to be gained
by trying older versions of LMS.
There are three areas where the fault may lie and the probelm may
involve all 3.
* the SB1 has a fault
* LMS post 7.9.0 SB1 startup is unreliable
* there is a network/firewall issue.

Since yeomanspc and patja have some similar SB1 issues - it seems there
is a LMS part of the problem. If the issue that yeomanspc and patja see
can be eliminated then it may make resolving any other issues on your
system easier.
As networks and processors have got much faster since SB1 launch -
timing could well be the issue (e.g. is LMS too fast at replying and SB1
isn't ready for reply).

A wireshark file of the exchange will show exactly what is happening
(timing and packets) in your failing system.  If the packet are OK, then
we may be able to offer patches to code to change the timing to see if
it change the problem.
A log of SB1 exchange with LMS (e.g. 8.1) logging with
network.protocol.slimproto set to DEBUG is also useful.  SB1 should be
ONLY player on network and SB1 should be powered up (i.e. unplug/plugin
main)  as part of the test.  This will show what LMS is doing.

IIRC Wireshark dissection was not wholly reliable.

The aim is to try to replicate the issue - the more information
provided, the easier it is.

> 
> The old Softsqueeze packages don't seem to emit any network traffic (I
> presume some Java incompatibility), so I can't test any servers with
> them.
> Softsqueeze 3.4 talks to the 6.2.2 server - it starts with the UDP
> discovery and after a bit of TCP traffic just pops up a message saying
> "this server is version 6.2.2, I only work with minimum 6.5.0".

I don't see the point in testing pre 7.9.0 server since SB1 worked OK
with 7.9.0 on your system.
IIRC in protocol terms Softsqueeze mainly emulates SB2 and later
generation.  Internally in LMS Softsqueeze has its own device type.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
bpa's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1806
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=113533

_______________________________________________
Squeezecenter mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/squeezecenter

Reply via email to