<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ>Hi,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ>My current Myth frontend and backend are both 0.25. So long over due for upgrade but don’t fancy iterative upgrade and anyways Fedora 18 is so out of support it’s not funny.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ>Plan is setup a 0.29 server, get it working, iron out the kinks and move the recordings from the old system to the new. I think that is a reasonable plan.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ>I am getting a bunch of problems having separate masters on the same subnet LAN, mostly around uPnP I suspect. Rapidly reaching the conclusion I am asking for trouble and may have to try a different approach, such as putting them on different subnets until it’s done. Don’t really want to do that, because firstly it’s a pain, but secondly my NAS is on the LAN and it will make things quite difficult without it.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ>I have tried Googling about this but again not much out there for this strategy.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ>So, am I simply asking for trouble or should I be turning of uPnP somehow ? If the answer is yes, you are asking for trouble, then I will make other plans, hope not, but rather know now </span><span lang=EN-NZ style='font-family:"Segoe UI Emoji",sans-serif'>😊</span><span lang=EN-NZ><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ>Any thoughts appreciated.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-NZ>Tony<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></body></html>