I’m trying to setup a new (second) Plex server for testing the DVR and I’m unable to access the server via http://localip:32400/web unless I delete the Preferences.xml. Once I do that, access the server, and login with my Plex account to the server, I’m then unable to access the server upon a server reboot until I delete the Preferences.xml file again.
Any ideas?
Hmmmm…No one’s had this issue?
Have you tried just using https://plex.tv/web/ and just claiming the server when Plex sees the new box?
@hthighway said:
Have you tried just using https://plex.tv/web/ and just claiming the server when Plex sees the new box?
When I claim the server that way, I get the following message when I reload plex.tv/web:
“An insecure media server has been found on your network. Reload app insecurely” And yes, secure connections is set to preferred in the new server’s settings.
Are both PMS instances logged in into plex.tv and remote access is possible for both? Did you set the local LAN settings for both? Did you set customer access urls?
@kopfpilot said:
Are both PMS instances logged in into plex.tv and remote access is possible for both? Did you set the local LAN settings for both? Did you set customer access urls?
Both are logged into with the same account and remote access is enabled and working on both. Nothing is set in the LAN settings or customer access URLs. I can access the second server if I reload the PlexWeb app insecurely but it won’t show up via the secure web app. I’ve tried turning secure connections from preferred to off, back to preferred, and also to required and no change.
I assume your installation is on a baremetal/virtual system operated in the same ip-range as the client and not in a docker container.
Please set secure connection to perfered on both instances.
Check if the remote port in remote acess are different for both instances and your router forwards the correct remote port to the corret instance-ip:32400 (the local port for a plex instance is allways 32400)
e.g in PMS instance1: remote port 32400, in router remote port 32400 -> Instance1:32400
in PMS intance2: remote port 32401: in router remote port 32401 -> Instance2:32400
open plex.tv and connect
plexWeb from plex.tv should be able to see and acccess both instances securely.
If this is sorted out we can tackle the next step.
When you refere to http://localip:32400/web you mean the localip of the individual instance, right?
I am running two PMS instances here myself and it works like a charm. Though, i am thinking to switch to the “plex remote transcoder”, where a main PMS orchestrates severall remote transcoders within the same PMS instance.
@kopfpilot said:
I assume your installation is on a baremetal/virtual system operated in the same ip-range as the client and not in a docker container.
Please set secure connection to perfered on both instances.
Check if the remote port in remote acess are different for both instances and your router forwards the correct remote port to the corret instance-ip:32400 (the local port for a plex instance is allways 32400)
e.g in PMS instance1: remote port 32400, in router remote port 32400 → Instance1:32400
in PMS intance2: remote port 32401: in router remote port 32401 → Instance2:32400open plex.tv and connect
plexWeb from plex.tv should be able to see and acccess both instances securely.
If this is sorted out we can tackle the next step.When you refere to http://localip:32400/web you mean the localip of the individual instance, right?
I am running two PMS instances here myself and it works like a charm. Though, i am thinking to switch to the “plex remote transcoder”, where a main PMS orchestrates severall remote transcoders within the same PMS instance.
Unfortunately your assumptions are incorrect.
Both PMS instances are in dockers inside Linux. PMS1 has a remote port of 52424 and PMS2 has remote port of 52400. Both are on the same local network (10.10.0.x).
PMS1 works with no issues what-so-ever. Yet PMS2 is not reachable via secure connection.
Wouldn’t it be nice if i wouldn’t have to do assumptions in the first place? 
So lets keep up the assumptions as it seems that you don’t see fit to provide required details by yourself.
Lets assume the containers are running on the same docker host and same bridged network. You do access your PMS1 with following mapping 52424:32400 using http://docker-host-ip:52424/web. PlexWeb opens in your browser but it can only see PMS1, but can’t see PMS2, even though they are in the same network.
Now here is the thing: your client is not in the same subnet as the bridged network where your containers are connected to. If no local lan is provided the ip-range of the PMS host’s ip is the only local lan used! Try adding your local lan ip-range AND the ip-range of the bridged network to both PMS configurations. Something like 192.168.0.0/255.255.255.0,10.10.0.0/255.255.255.0 (though, this depends on your ip-range and your netmask).
@kopfpilot said:
Wouldn’t it be nice if i wouldn’t have to do assumptions in the first place?So lets keep up the assumptions as it seems that you don’t see fit to provide required details by yourself.
Lets assume the containers are running on the same docker host and same bridged network. You do access your PMS1 with following mapping 52424:32400 using http://docker-host-ip:52424/web. PlexWeb opens in your browser but it can only see PMS1, but can’t see PMS2, even though they are in the same network.
Now here is the thing: your client is not in the same subnet as the bridged network where your containers are connected to. If no local lan is provided the ip-range of the PMS host’s ip is the only local lan used! Try adding your local lan ip-range AND the ip-range of the bridged network to both PMS configurations. Something like 192.168.0.0/255.255.255.0,10.10.0.0/255.255.255.0 (though, this depends on your ip-range and your netmask).
My apologies for not providing more information, I’m just not sure what is and isn’t pertinent. The dockers are on completely different hosts.
UbuntuSvr01
PMS1 Docker - 10.10.0.200 (Public port of 52424)
UbuntuSvr02
PMS2 Docker - 10.10.0.201 (Public port of 52400)
I’m confused why I even need remote access to be turned on to be able to access the server via the secure app LOCALLY via https://10.10.201:32400/web (which I cannot right now). Therefore any reference to the public ports seems moot to me.
true that, local connections with secure connections disabled do not require remote access.
Whenever secure connection is used you need to login with your pms account to register the instances at plex.tv and setup the remote connection. In order to match the ssl certificate provided by plex, your PMS instances will be accessed using your remote access previously registered at plex.tv.
What i said before still applies: a plex instance in a docker bridged network requires your clients-lan range AND your bridged network range to be listed as local lan’s. This would explain why you have to delete the prefences.xml in order to access the box.
Is it required that PMS1 is able to access PMS2 in some ways? Even though the PlexWeb process is running in a browser on a client from your local client, it won’t be able to “find” the other instance unless you enable remote access.
The least complicated solution would be to run both PSM containers with network=host option. They would become part of your client network and everything would work like a charm.
Could your share your port mapping as well?
@kopfpilot said:
true that, local connections with secure connections disabled do not require remote access.Whenever secure connection is used you need to login with your pms account to register the instances at plex.tv and setup the remote connection. In order to match the ssl certificate provided by plex, your PMS instances will be accessed using your remote access previously registered at plex.tv.
What i said before still applies: a plex instance in a docker bridged network requires your clients-lan range AND your bridged network range to be listed as local lan’s. This would explain why you have to delete the prefences.xml in order to access the box.
Is it required that PMS1 is able to access PMS2 in some ways? Even though the PlexWeb process is running in a browser on a client from your local client, it won’t be able to “find” the other instance unless you enable remote access.
The least complicated solution would be to run both PSM containers with network=host option. They would become part of your client network and everything would work like a charm.
Could your share your port mapping as well?
Ahh, thanks for the explanation with regard to using secure connections. I was not aware remote access was required.
Anyhow, I do have remote access enabled on both and both are using host networking not bridged mode. My dockers’ config is below (it’s the same for both):
–name=plex
–net=host
-e VERSION=1.2.0.2838-a68e2fe
-e PGID=1000 -e PUID=1000
-v /etc/localtime:/etc/localtime:ro
-v /data/plex:/config
-v /storage/movies:/media/movies
-v /storage/tv:/media/tv
-v /storage/dvr:/media/dvr
-v ‘/data/plexdata/Cache:/config/Library/Application Support/Plex Media Server/Cache’
-v ‘/data/plexdata/Media:/config/Library/Application Support/Plex Media Server/Media’ \
EDIT: The only difference I just noticed is the PMS version. The config above which is the new server I’ve setup is using the DVR version where as my PMS1 is using VERSION=latest.
Ah, okay. If you already use network=host then the ip’s you pasted above are your Docker-Host ip’s thus both PMS instances do run in the same network which in fact IS your local lan. So the whole Docker factor can be taken out of the equation.
What happens if you try to access your PMS2 instance using your wan ip? I am currious if it works for http.
The objective is to figure out if your portforwarding is working properly.
@kopfpilot said:
Ah, okay. If you already use network=host then the ip’s you pasted above are your Docker-Host ip’s thus both PMS instances do run in the same network which in fact IS your local lan. So the whole Docker factor can be taken out of the equation.What happens if you try to access your PMS2 instance using your wan ip? I am currious if it works for http.
The objective is to figure out if your portforwarding is working properly.
Yes, I can confirm I just accessed PMS2 via remote access but the connection in insecure.
Since you proved that the remote access is technicaly possible, everything seem to boil down to a problem with the ssl certificate.
What happens if you access it with https? Does your browser complain about an “isecure conntection” and the site owner did not setup the website properly? Can you paste a screenshot of the browser response… if you don’t want to share it here… send it as pm.
But wait, wasn’t the original problem that you can’t access PMS2 using https://10.10.0.201:32400/web.
I must admit that i am more surprised that you are able to acces PMS1 using https://10.10.0.200:32400/web.
PMS1 does not behave correct unless you accepted the certifcate of the insecure connection or created an own certificate for that ip and added it to your pms configuration and added it to your browser.
@kopfpilot said:
Since you proved that the remote access is technicaly possible, everything seem to boil down to a problem with the ssl certificate.What happens if you access it with https? Does your browser complain about an “isecure conntection” and the site owner did not setup the website properly? Can you paste a screenshot of the browser response… if you don’t want to share it here… send it as pm.
The browser does not give me any kind of cert error. I just get the following:
“This site can’t be reached. 10.10.0.201 unexpectedly closed the connection.”
I just changed secure connections from “preferred” to “required” and after rebooting I can no longer access the server via http as expected. To access the server again I will need to delete the preferences again.
And yes, I can access PMS1 via https only by proceeding past the cert warning. But I don’t even get that warning for PMS2. PMS1 works via secure connections as illustrated by the green lock.
Keep it preferred for time beeing. Can you try to access it using Firefox? In Firefox you’ll get an “extended” button. If you click on it you will see something like
Now here is the thing: PMS uses HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), where most browsers do not allow to add exceptions for invalid certificates. I guess you added the invalid certificate for PMS1 befor HSTS was introduced.
Not sure if it can be disalbed.
Though, both servers should be accessible from plex.tv without a problem, as the certificate matches the access url.
firefox allows to add invalid certicates for hosts in the local lan, but not for remote host (like when you access your pms instance using your wan-ip
@kopfpilot said:
Keep it preferred for time beeing. Can you try to access it using Firefox? In Firefox you’ll get an “extended” button. If you click on it you will see something like
Now here is the thing: PMS uses HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), where most browsers do not allow to add exceptions for invalid certificates. I guess you added the invalid certificate for PMS1 befor HSTS was introduced.
Not sure if it can be disalbed.Though, both servers should be accessible from plex.tv without a problem, as the certificate matches the access url.
I use Chrome and when I access PMS1 via https://10.10.0.200:32400/web I do get a cert warning but I can proceed anyway. Note I’m only access PMS1 this way for testing right now. I normally just access PMS through plex.tv with no issues.
I’ve tried accessing PMS2 via https via Chrome and IE but I will try Firefox as well.
EDIT: No go from Firefox either. The connection just dies right away, doesn’t even time out. Stumped on this one.
if access from plex.tv fails:
You can use the developer mode in any browser to further debug what the problem is. If you open the network tab in the developer mode of any browser and launch plexweb from plex.tv you will see severall calls to a domain similar to 77-XX-XX-XX.be59470XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.plex.direct:32401, actualy that’s the domain the ssl certificate plex provides is valid for 
If the network socket does not even forward to your docker instance, there is something seriously wrong.
Just for the sake of having it tested, i would restart the machine and check if the behavior is the same.
And of course set the version of PMS2 to be the same as PMS1 to rule out problems with the DVR image.
You can always downgrade to the DVR version…
Appart from that: I am out of ideas.
