0

Weird thing happening with our react app in its video call process. We have tested almost every option in /etc/turnserver.conf to find the problem and checked log several times. Our app works fine with paid turnservers such as metered but when trying to check our own packets succeed but no data is coming to our clients. TurnServer has been checked with trickle ice in advance. Here is the config file and log file. Any help is appreciated.

Config :

min-port=10000 max-port=20000 fingerprint user=USER:PASSWORD lt-cred-mech realm=OUR_DOMAIN log-file=/var/log/turnserver/turnserver.log verbose external-ip=OUR_IP cli-password=OUR_CLI_PASSWORD

Log: : handle_udp_packet: New UDP endpoint: local addr OUR_IP:9127, remote addr PEER2:26679 3: session 000000000000000001: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user <>: incoming packet BINDING processed, success 28: handle_udp_packet: New UDP endpoint: local addr OUR_IP:9127, remote addr PEER2:26682 28: handle_udp_packet: New UDP endpoint: local addr OUR_IP:9127, remote addr PEER2:26681 28: session 001000000000000001: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user <>: incoming packet BINDING processed, success 28: session 000000000000000002: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user <>: incoming packet BINDING processed, success 28: session 001000000000000001: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user <>: incoming packet message processed, error 401: Unauthorized 28: session 000000000000000002: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user <>: incoming packet message processed, error 401: Unauthorized 28: IPv4. Local relay addr: OUR_IP:19045 28: session 000000000000000002: new, realm=<OUR_DOMAIN>, username=, lifetime=600 28: session 000000000000000002: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet ALLOCATE processed, success 28: IPv4. Local relay addr: OUR_IP:12749 28: session 001000000000000001: new, realm=<OUR_DOMAIN>, username=, lifetime=600 28: session 001000000000000001: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet ALLOCATE processed, success 32: session 000000000000000002: refreshed, realm=<OUR_DOMAIN>, username=, lifetime=0 32: session 000000000000000002: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet REFRESH processed, success 32: handle_udp_packet: New UDP endpoint: local addr OUR_IP:9127, remote addr PEER1:38872 32: session 001000000000000002: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user <>: incoming packet message processed, error 401: Unauthorized 32: IPv4. Local relay addr: OUR_IP:11002 32: session 001000000000000002: new, realm=<OUR_DOMAIN>, username=, lifetime=600
32: session 001000000000000002: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet ALLOCATE processed, success 32: session 001000000000000002: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet BINDING processed, success 32: session 001000000000000001: peer 21.202.221.104 lifetime updated: 300 32: session 001000000000000001: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet CREATE_PERMISSION processed, success 32: session 001000000000000001: peer OUR_IP lifetime updated: 300 32: session 001000000000000001: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet CREATE_PERMISSION processed, success 33: session 001000000000000001: peer PEER1 lifetime updated: 300 33: session 001000000000000001: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet CREATE_PERMISSION processed, success 33: session 000000000000000002: closed (2nd stage), user realm <OUR_DOMAIN> origin <>, local OUR_IP:9127, remote PEER2:26682, reason: allocation timeout 42: session 001000000000000002: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet BINDING processed, success 38: session 001000000000000001: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet BINDING processed, success 48: session 001000000000000001: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet BINDING processed, success 52: session 001000000000000002: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet BINDING processed, success 59: session 001000000000000001: realm <OUR_DOMAIN> user : incoming packet BINDING processed, success

Tried checking turn server with trickle ice and no error found. Checked paid turnservers and they seem to work just fine.

Mohammadsadegh
  • 111
  • 1
  • 6

1 Answers1

0

I found out that there is a bug in official release in ubuntu repositories. Built with source code but now my stun server doesn't work as expected :))

Mohammadsadegh
  • 111
  • 1
  • 6