From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qc0-x22c.google.com (mail-qc0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EA0621F113 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:19:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qc0-f172.google.com with SMTP id c9so3366377qcz.31 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:19:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=CF0t2uJyaCjXtTlg16yEY20jCNaOMljtJuQlkS5XipY=; b=AavYOWB5ObCfmcWW3jLGkLkZHyHHlwavDpOCzibj/vYyl5eXf+SG9vXk+w3tlpGUEf 90T4rt8ZRyRHGVfoINFWYzqMMiPxo7A4xyhiwW2VCsS0T/0UWmiFBICQVMb3FYVFpfzj thhp1iGwOgUl3aPXS6T4HnF2aShmrgaLMnU85E9NB4efIRdZCzk+GOUfN4Dj+apSDWNR 1Jxlee5EGvwsAu7JwYYO4ni0+0N7uhS6CUis7+ZN2la9uwPg35g2Xk0clJu7Q5mGp6M1 xHIGc0dLPv62nQLxsDJHNNifJgtk+1QfUccV3BZ8+lsOxuNQdjrmdeq7dcYtbS+6opV9 kjZg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.168.13 with SMTP id s13mr14744750qay.18.1391019584116; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:19:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.224.42.70 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:19:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1391016331.21340.76849577.4C0BB967@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1391016331.21340.76849577.4C0BB967@webmail.messagingengine.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:19:44 -0800 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Paul Handly Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] upnpd problem semi-solved X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:19:45 -0000 Well, I see ipv6 support in the current codebase, don't know if it's in the codebase I'm trying now... my understanding of the separate minissdp server was that it acted as an arbitrator between multiple possible users of the functionality (like dlna) On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Paul Handly wrote: > SSDP registration (server) and subsequent discovery (client) across > subnets was what I needed minissdpd for, but the devices I was trying to > drive (Sonos) are kind of pricey as a test case. > > Having an IPv6 address on the listen interface/s broke the old build of > minissdpd, so I had to choose between IPv6 and Sonos. > > -- > Paul Handly > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014, at 11:55, Dave Taht wrote: >> The version I was carrying in ceropackages was obsolete and didn't >> integrate >> into fw3. Dropped that release, built from openwrt head, I can open port= s >> now >> from the transmission bittorrent client and from dns-sd (on macos) now. >> >> the author tells me the latest version (not what I built, it's only a >> few days old) does PCP also. >> >> 1) It's not clear to me why minissdpd was needed? >> >> 2) Are there any other test cases I could try? >> >> -- >> Dave T=E4ht >> >> Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: >> http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html >> _______________________________________________ >> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel --=20 Dave T=E4ht Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.= html