Hi, On 26 Jan 2010, at 19:36, Benny Prijono wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Ruud Klaver <r.klaver at sping.nl> wrote: >>> Did you see (in the log) whether ICE negotiation has been successful? >>> No RTP packets can be exchanged before ICE negotiation is successful. >> >> Yes, it specifically mentions this in the logs. Also, it's sending an UPDATE request reflecting the result of the negotiation (I gather this is a new feature in 1.5). >> > > Yeah, but only when the negotiated candidate pairs are different than > the default candidates (as the spec mandates). This could be something > to be curious about. It is, because the default candidate is IIRC the server reflexive candidate. As the endpoints are behind the same NAT, the resulting candidate is a private IP address. > >>> Now that's weird, and I don't think we support two steram objects in >>> one call! That could explain the whole thing. >> >> One seems to be created when the INVITE is received (I only looked at the callee in this case) and one is created when a 200 OK to the received UPDATE is sent. >> >> Would it help if I included the logs? >> > > Yep. > > Cheers > Benny Logs included, zipped because of size. As you can see I upgraded to 1.5.5, the result seems to be the same. You can see that two stream objects are created, I only received once call during this log. I do actually see UDP traffic between the two correct IPs, but wireshark is not identifying it as RTP. Perhaps it's the traffic that is sent when silence is detected on the conference bridge? I can't quite recall what that looked like. Thanks for the help. Best regards, Ruud Klaver Sping -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pjsip.log.zip Type: application/zip Size: 35963 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.pjsip.org/pipermail/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org/attachments/20100127/d12eb2a6/attachment-0001.zip>
