Hopefully someone from Sling can clear this up, but as someone with a similar setup to yourself, my experience is this:
- I have port 5001 open, and the fact that the Slingcatcher works at all shows this port must be open, since Slingcatcher only works with TCP
- however, both the web player and the desktop software quite often choose to use SNATT, rather than TCP.
My conclusion is that SNATT isn't so much a fallback as a preference under certain conditions. Indeed I can get a fractionally better stream rate through SNATT using the web/desktop player, compared to TCP via the Slingcatcher, which bears out my theory. Your stats would appear to back this up too.
So perhaps it is a routing problem - maybe opening a TCP connection from your Slingcatcher to your Slingbox suffers some kind of routing problem.
As I say, Sling will know all the answers as they will know the circumstances under which SNATT is chosen over TCP, however I've yet to read anything from them that explains it.
If it is an issue with routing, the only solution I can think to this would be to route your Slingcatcher through a proxy server so that you can open up a better TCP connection. Unfortunately, this isn't possible directly via the Slingcatcher interface so you have to do something creative to achieve it. This also isn't guaranteed to work, though the effect of using a proxy can be dramatic in some situations.
My setup, for reference is:
Slingbox Pro-HD in London
Slingcatcher in Istanbul
I chatted with a Slingbox tech who seemed to confirm that TCP is required for the new "connected device" category. So I guess I have to get this working if I want to consider one of those devices. He suggested trying another port, which I'll try next but I'm somewhat skeptical. Any recommendations for which to try? I don't want to use 443 as some people have suggested because that should be reserved for https (which I may use later).
Also, perhaps related to the port problem is the MTU packet size. I noticed my remote router (where I watch) is set to 1500. Some people have said this may be too large. Is getting the right size trial and error? And does the MTU need to be changed on both the host (where the slingbox is) & remote router?
Here's what I'd try:
- try port 443 anyway to see if it makes a difference. If it doesn't, then the issue probably isn't related to something restricing port 5001.
- I'm assuming that you also get the poor bitrate using Slingplayer for Windows? If so you could try using a proxy server to see if this helps. You can enter the settings for the proxy server inside the Windows player software. You can get a trial with this company (https://www.trustedproxies.com/) and they'll give you a selection of servers to try.
Essentially this would force your connection to take a route through a particular server, which may improve things and reduce latency. No guarantees of course, but the effects can be dramatic in some situations and you have nothing to lose by trying other than time spent setting it up (which isn't much).
(By the way, I have no connection with the company above other than I use their services.)
Not to sure about the MTU size, or its effect. I can't imagine it's going to make a big dfference, though I could be wrong!
I finally got this to work after taking a long hiatus on working on it. I sold my SlingCatcher, so I didn't have a need for it, but I got interested again after the release of SlingPlayer for Connected devices, now available on more platforms! So now there's Boxee and WD. I suspect apple is working on adding applications to their AppleTV, and when they do, I'm sure we'll see support for it from Slingbox (for a price I'm sure...hopefully NOT $30 which if you're listening slingbox, is a ridiculous fee to charge per device, especially when you can only watch one stream at a time.)
The problem as it turns out was on the firewall. The sling setup page couldn't configure the firewall automatically, so I did it manually. And tested it with one of the port checking webpages. Now it works! I'll be doing performance testing for the next week comparing it to the SNATT connection which was very stable! For this reason I like SNATT, so I'll be very unhappy if I don't get the same results on port 5001 TCP. Otherwise all the "connected products" will be worthless.