Jitsi Meet server failing to connect more than two participents

Greetings, fellow Jitsiers.

I am attempting to setup a small (<15 participants) Jitsi Meet server. I have followed the instructions here:


but have been unable to get >2 participant chats to work reliably.

Here is my current setup:
The Jitsi Meet server is an Intel NUC DC3217IYE
Processor: Intel® Core™ i3-3217U
RAM: 4GB
Internal storage: 16GB mSATA SSD
Operating system: Debian 10
IPv6 has been disabled

The server is connected directly to the AT&T-provided router via Ethernet
The AT&T router is configured to forward all externally-originating packets to the Jitsi Meet server, so individual ports shouldn’t need to be forwarded.

I have purchased a domain name and configured one subdomain to point at my external IP address.
I have also configured a Let’s Encrypt certificate, which appears to work flawlessly.

Per the instructions in the quick start guide, I have added these two lines:

org.ice4j.ice.harvest.NAT_HARVESTER_LOCAL_ADDRESS=[The IP address that the AT&T router is configured to assign the Jitsi box]
org.ice4j.ice.harvest.NAT_HARVESTER_PUBLIC_ADDRESS=[My current external IP address]
to this file:
/etc/jitsi/videobridge/sip-communicator.properties
I have also commented out this line:
org.ice4j.ice.harvest.STUN_MAPPING_HARVESTER_ADDRESSES
from the above file.

Finally, I have configured the secure domain detailed here:

Unfortunately, the entire setup seems to be extremely unreliable when it comes to multi-party video conferencing. Sometimes it works, but 90% of the time participants see blank video or fail to connect. Sometimes clients on the LAN will see that the server isn’t responding.

I’m happy to post whatever log messages you would like to see. I’ve checked:
journalctl
/var/log/jitsi/*
and none of them have shown errors.

Thank you very much for your time!

Hi, I had the same problem (Debian 10, quick-start guide, behind NAT, no error in the logs):
New participant kicks first participant, strange connection error in jvb.log
I “solved” the problem by not commenting the line :
org.ice4j.ice.harvest.STUN_MAPPING_HARVESTER_ADDRESSES

Maybe this also works in your case?
Please be aware, that the devs still have not answered my question, whether this is a valid and secure configuration.
Best, Tobias

@Toba,

Unfortunately that didn’t seem to make any difference :frowning:

Are there particular logs that the developers need to attempt to diagnose the problem?