Skip to main content
July 13, 2010
Question

RTMPT very slow to connect (10.1 player, FMS 3.0)

  • July 13, 2010
  • 1 reply
  • 869 views

Hi, we're having many problems with our clients being unable to connect to our FMS. When they try to connect, nothing happens for around 90 seconds, then the connection finally succeeds (except most users have given up before that 90 seconds is up!). I've looked at the FMS access log as a user is trying to connect, and nothing appears until that ~90 seconds is over, then the user activity appears in the logs.

It seems to be specific to clients with Flash Player 10.1, connecting to our FMS (3.0).

- Using Player 9, they can connect fine.

- Using Player 10.1 with FMS 2.0 is fine too.

- Using Player 10.1 and FMS 3.0 = problem.

FYI, we're setting up a RTMPT connection directly to port 80 (i.e. not trying RTMP or any other port and then 'falling back').

Does 10.1 work with later versions of the FMS? If anyone can help, I'd really appreciate it. We can't ask all our clients to roll back to 10.0 or earlier, and as it stands anyone who has upgraded cannot use our system.

Many thanks!

Mike.

    This topic has been closed for replies.

    1 reply

    July 14, 2010

    More interesting info:

    We've found that if we connect specifying port 443 on the FMS server, there's no delay. A user who was experiencing this 1-2 minute delay, now connects immediately when connecting to port 443.

    So, it seems for some users, the RTMPT connection to port 80 fails (after 90-120 seconds), then falls back onto some other port after 90-120 seconds. Which is strange, as I thought the 'port order' is 443, then 1935, then 80, then fail.

    Also, if we open an RTMPT connection without specifying any port, that'll also have the delay. Any idea why this might be? We've also tried other ports, (such as 8080) and these also fail for the users experiencing issues (but work fine for us).

    Does anyone know why port 80 would fail for some users (in particular, users with Flash 10.1) and not others?

    Or why port 443 works, but not any other port?

    Greatly appreciate any help or advice.

    July 14, 2010

    Correction to the above: the order is 1935, then 443, then 80. Hence - since only port 443 is working (for the users with issues), it makes sense that it doesn't work if we don't specify any port. It's trying port 1935 first, and that's failing.

    Of course, we still have no idea why ports 1935 or 80 aren't working for those users.