This discussion is locked
geychaner

Q: iChat AV SNATMAP broken at Apple *WITH LOG*

Thought I'd add some info to the AV problem discussions recently. Just tried a video chat with my wife that was working days ago. Both of us can chat to appleu3testXX fine. No router or other changes in the last few days (unless every ISP in the world is yanking our chains, because I have made multiple tries to and from multiple locations w/o success). Anyway, running from the command line with errorLogLevel -7 reveals the following excerpts (Real IP addresses replaced with * just to be safe):

222744.438302 Rearranging IPINFO.
222744.438313 LOCAL: ifname=[en0], IP=[139.**.***.**], PORT = 5060
222744.438323 LOCAL: ifname=[en0(IPv6)], IP=[***:***...], PORT = 5060
222744.438339 LOCAL: ifname=[en0~], IP=[116.**.***.**], PORT = 5060
222744.438364 ER_AddFilter (1): Adding [200.**.***.**]->[uen1.1]
222744.438379 ER_AddFilter (2): Adding [63.**.***.**]->[uen1~.2]
222744.438391 Recovered true IP: ifname=[en1], IP=[7.0.168.192]
222744.438403 sendPing: 192.168.0.7:5060
222744.438430 Sending SNATMAP heartbeat to C0A80007:5060
222744.438502 Sending SNATMAP heartbeat to C0A80007:5060
222744.438530 Sending SNATMAP heartbeat to C0A80007:5060

Note that it pings my wife's internal IP address, not the external one a couple of lines above.

222749.769793 CALLEE: ifname=[en1], IP=[192.168.0.7], wPort = 5060
222749.769841 ( )( )( ) ---- <nil> valid returned 0
2007-02-28 22:27:49.770 iChat[733] IPAndPortList: ({ip = "192.168.0.7"; port = 5060; })
222749.770078 =========== OpenPorts!

Still using the internal IP address.

To: "******" <sip:user@192.168.0.7>
From: "geychaner@mac.com8" <sip:user@**.***.***.**>;tag=1821486346
Call-ID: 11beb370-c794-11db-99b8-eb34d68f13c4@**-***-***-**
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Contact: <sip:user@**.***.***.**>;isfocus

Still trying the internal IP address instead of the external one, just before it gives up and closes the chat.

-G.

MacBook 13, Mac OS X (10.4.8)

Posted on Feb 28, 2007 5:53 PM

Close

Q: iChat AV SNATMAP broken at Apple *WITH LOG*

  • All replies
  • Helpful answers

  • by geychaner,

    geychaner geychaner Mar 1, 2007 5:13 PM in response to geychaner
    Level 1 (5 points)
    Mar 1, 2007 5:13 PM in response to geychaner
    The problem has disappeared today, with no changes at either end. Since I actually bothered to report it to Apple, hopefully it was they who fixed it.
  • by DanH,

    DanH DanH Mar 2, 2007 11:04 AM in response to geychaner
    Level 5 (4,370 points)
    Mar 2, 2007 11:04 AM in response to geychaner
    Not fixed.

    I see the same set of errors which cropped up suddenly a day or so ago with no changes in software or settings to account for them.

    Today tried jabber video chat right after AIM vid chat failed for the billionth time and jabber is working fine on the same two computers over the same two broadband connections.

    -dan
  • by Ralph Johns (UK),

    Ralph Johns (UK) Ralph Johns (UK) Mar 4, 2007 12:17 PM in response to geychaner
    Level 9 (73,348 points)
    Applications
    Mar 4, 2007 12:17 PM in response to geychaner
    Some background notes on this.

    In iChat 2.x there used to be a small log appear in Connection Doctor > Error drop down

    This used to show both Public and LAN IPs and both ports along with the error message that appeared on the Video chat window.

    IN the corresponding error to the current Error 8 it would just list port 5060 (hopefully) and if the port was changed at all between the Public IP and LAN IP you knew it was a NAT problem (most likely multiple devices doing NAT)

    If the LAN IP was not listed you knew that it was port 5060 that was at fault (Not Open or a VoIP issue such as Adapters in Line or Modems that were aware)

    In the case of chats that failed at the next stage (error 8 with details) it used to list the IPs both Public and LAN at both ends plus the ports that it was going to use.
    Depending if there were any Port Changes here And on which IP you could tell were the ports were not set correctly.

    Chats that ended with the 10 Sec error message would also list all IPs and Ports which helped pin down problems with the above item.

    I am not surprised the Log shows the details of the LAN IP

    On the basis that all iChat A/V calls go through SNATMAP it would seem it may, now and then, have capacity problems. Particularly with the influx of Intel based computers with In-Built cameras.


    However this does not explain DanH's experience of being able to use a Jabber name to Jabber name over iChat which would still involve the A/V side of iChat and SNATMAP

    The standard error logs you get with iChat in 10.4.7 and 10.4.8 are kept on your computer in /Users/(your account)/Library/Logs/iChatConnectionErrors and they list LAN and Public IPs for your end at least.



    8:20 PM Sunday; March 4, 2007
  • by DanH,

    DanH DanH Mar 4, 2007 2:15 PM in response to Ralph Johns (UK)
    Level 5 (4,370 points)
    Mar 4, 2007 2:15 PM in response to Ralph Johns (UK)
    Don't know enough to be more than slightly dangerous [g], but does it make a difference that my Jabber access is via talk.google.com on port 5223?

    -dan
  • by Ralph Johns (UK),

    Ralph Johns (UK) Ralph Johns (UK) Mar 4, 2007 2:37 PM in response to DanH
    Level 9 (73,348 points)
    Applications
    Mar 4, 2007 2:37 PM in response to DanH
    Hi DanH,

    Nope.

    Jabber is essentially Text based.

    However in iChat you can register with what ever server you like.

    So can your other iChat Buddies.

    Once you have the Jabber name in your Jabber Buddy List you can Text chat.

    Now iChat needs the Buddy Lists to see who is on line but after that for the A/V side it operates on its own.

    So if you have a Jabber Buddy who is also on iChat you can use the A/V side. It's an iChat A/V chat using the same methods as iChat to AIM Buddies on PCs or as in this case iChat to and iChat Buddy.. It just happens to be from the Jabber Buddy list.

    Consequently it send the first Invite on port 5678 and follows that up with the SIP on port 5060 and connects on 4 ports from 16384-16403 (which will involve the SNATMAP server on port 5060 up until the connection is made).

    The only difference I can think it might be is the Feedback for the AIM and Jabber servers is different as to their Capabilities at the time you call, (although a Buddy with a camera to a Buddy without can over-ride this in iChat) so I think that is a red herring.

    At the moment it remains a Puzzle.



    10:40 PM Sunday; March 4, 2007
  • by DanH,

    DanH DanH Mar 4, 2007 2:52 PM in response to Ralph Johns (UK)
    Level 5 (4,370 points)
    Mar 4, 2007 2:52 PM in response to Ralph Johns (UK)
    At the risk of revealing more of my ignorance [g], let me add that I had the Jabber account before I ever got AIM. I got it as part of signing up for Google Talk, whose beta is in progress and allows voice chats just like AIM.

    But you are correct that it did not "do" video until I signed up for AIM.

    I suppose it's possible that the successful jabber video was at a moment of lighter server load and the failed connections were during heavy traffic, but I have no way to verify that.

    In any case, thanks for your helpful explanations and here's hoping it becomes reliable for video soon.

    -dan



    BlacBook, iMac 15, G1, G3, G5 iPods   Mac OS X (10.4.8)   Boot Camp
  • by Jan Pieter Melchior,

    Jan Pieter Melchior Jan Pieter Melchior Mar 6, 2007 1:53 PM in response to DanH
    Level 2 (420 points)
    Mar 6, 2007 1:53 PM in response to DanH
  • by DanH,

    DanH DanH Mar 6, 2007 2:12 PM in response to Jan Pieter Melchior
    Level 5 (4,370 points)
    Mar 6, 2007 2:12 PM in response to Jan Pieter Melchior
    Umm, can you help a noob understand where in that mass of data the solution lives?

    Thanks,

    -dan
  • by Jan Pieter Melchior,

    Jan Pieter Melchior Jan Pieter Melchior Mar 6, 2007 2:38 PM in response to DanH
    Level 2 (420 points)
    Mar 6, 2007 2:38 PM in response to DanH
    Think this discussion kind of touches the issue, it is a story where no-one is right, and no-one is wrong. That's why it takes so long to fix.

    http://lists.apple.com/archives/ipv6/2003/Jun/msg00035.html

    JP
  • by Jan Pieter Melchior,

    Jan Pieter Melchior Jan Pieter Melchior Mar 9, 2007 2:36 AM in response to DanH
    Level 2 (420 points)
    Mar 9, 2007 2:36 AM in response to DanH
    today:

    The VoIP calls between Viagenie in Canada and Consulintel in Spain, were placed using the CounterPath eyebeam softphone through the IPv6 version of the Asterisk open source IP PBX, ported by Viagenie, a consulting and R&D firm in advanced IP networking. The Asterisk-IPv6 server was located on Stealth Communications' Voice Peering Fabric (VPF) network - a distributed ethernet network that functions as an exchange or meet-point for organisations around the world and which carries over one-hundred billion minutes annually.

    IPv6 is being introduced in part to solve the looming problem of a shortage of IPv4 addresses. Network address translation (NAT) widely used today will no longer be required under IPv6. Work is already underway in Australia to gear up for its widespread deployment.
    According to Marc Blanchet, president of Viagenie. "Asterisk-IPv6 shows the power of VoIPv6 by avoiding all issues regarding NAT traversal when using IPv4. The presence of NAT for VoIPv4 results in users issues, such as non-connecting calls, one-way audio, non-working DTMF. Asterisk-IPv6 solves all these issues and also brings, together with IPv6, true IP mobility, security and auto configuration of VoIPv6 phones."

    IPv6 Forum president, Latif Ladid, said: "The IPv6 Forum and its IPv6 Ready Program are adding SIP into its test suite to promote SIP and IPv6 interoperability worldwide. This is another major milestone in demonstrating true end to end services." stresses

    Jason Fischl, CTO of CounterPath, claimed that: This series of calls demonstrates a successful test of IPv6 in a real network and represents an important step toward the widespread deployment of IPv6 technology.