Re: [Turnserver-users] Bad magic cookie

[atomic <at...@ba...>]

Probably I can answer by myself...
The SIP clients I used, and all the SIP clients I know, implements RFC3489.
In the new RFC5389 there is a dedicated field for the Magic cookie in the STUN Binding request, instead in the old implementation the Magic cookie was part of the Transaction ID field.From the RFC5389:"12.2.  Changes to Server ProcessingA STUN server can detect when a given Binding request message was
   sent from an RFC 3489 [RFC3489] client by the absence of the correct
   value in the magic cookie field.  When the server detects an RFC 3489
   client, it SHOULD copy the value seen in the magic cookie field in
   the Binding request to the magic cookie field in the Binding response
   message, and insert a MAPPED-ADDRESS attribute instead of an XOR-
   MAPPED-ADDRESS attribute."
 
It seems that this mechanism is not implemented on Turnserver, because when a request without Magic cookie field arrives, Turnserver drops the request.
Is this correct? Regards,
Antonio. 
 




> Hi all,
> I compiled turnserver 0.5 and also tried with SVN.When a SIP client sends a "Stun Binding Request" to the turnserver, I don't see any response from it.Running
 turnserver with debug enabled, after receiving the STUN request from 
the client, turnserver prints the error "Bad magic cookie".
> Could you please suggest the solution for this issue?Thanks.Best Regards.
>  Antonio