Allow adding the same sunshine instance multiple times

[nnmmaaoo]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. I would really like an option to add multiple different ip addresses that lead to the same sunshine host. As of now that is not possible - if i enter the ip for the second time nothing happens.

Describe the solution you'd like Interface would remain the same, but maybe you would get a warning along the lines of "WHAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO DO IS KINDA STUPID, ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO ADD THE SAME SUNSHINE HOST AGAIN?"

Describe alternatives you've considered An alternative for now is to perform the pin entering authentication every time i need to switch between the direct connection and the vps route.

Additional context Reason why i am asking is this: i have a bad link somewhere between my moonlight client and sunshine host. Sometimes it REALLY acts up and i am forced to use a vps that i set up to forward all traffic from the vps to the sunshine host to have usable connection speed.

[cgutman]

I don't think it's feasible to do this as described, because the internal host tracking uses the UUID reported by the host to track it. We can't use an IP address because hosts can have multiple IP addresses and they can change (even to match the IP addresses of different hosts, if we get unlucky).

There are things that happen behind the scenes if you Add PC with a new IP address for an existing host. We keep track of 4 IP addresses for every host:

• LAN IPv4 address (if discovered via mDNS)
• WAN IPv4 address (if discovered via mDNS or added manually with a LAN IP address)
• IPv6 address (if discovered via mDNS)
• Manual IP address or hostname (whatever the address you use through the Add PC dialog)

Assuming this is a remote host (non-LAN), adding manually should change the manual IP address, which should result in Moonlight using that address to connect instead. You can confirm in the Moonlight logs (%TEMP% directory on your client for Windows).

[nnmmaaoo]

We can't use an IP address because hosts can have multiple IP addresses

maybe it would be possible to add the moonlight-assigned computer name into the mix for identification?

Assuming this is a remote host (non-LAN), adding manually should change the manual IP address, which should result in Moonlight using that address to connect instead. You can confirm in the Moonlight logs (%TEMP% directory on your client for Windows).

Ok, ill check it out. Im running moonlight on linux, i assume just running moonlight from the cli would be enough?

[nnmmaaoo]

Assuming this is a remote host (non-LAN), adding manually should change the manual IP address, which should result in Moonlight using that address to connect instead. You can confirm in the Moonlight logs (%TEMP% directory on your client for Windows).

This works. Sorry, i did not notice this before. This is an acceptable workaround for me, but i still would like to have both connections so i wouldnt have to switch them every time. Thank you for your help :)

[thghca]

It is possible to stop moonlight from using lan address? My home lan reachable via vpn but it lags when streaming over it.

[elderlabs]

What are the chances of a list of known IPs for a machine's UUID? I'd like to access a machine that may share a local network with my PC, or a VPN network, both of which share different IP ranges, thus it is a pain to update the existing entry multiple times each day with the local address when I'm on-site, or the VPN address when I'm off-site. What's nice is that I can enter the IP and have the existing entry update immediately, but it still requires the updating of the IP address.

As I'm not a fan of Windows multicast security implementation, I have "automatically discover PCs on my local network" disabled.

As for why I distrust Windows' multicast implementation, I do not have a huge issue with it on a private local network; my issue is that it's also looking for things on untrusted public and work networks -- which are absolutely insecure. My PC should *not exist* to other PCs on a stranger's network, for lack of better term. No amount of firewalling can fix this, and Microsoft does not appear to care about the issue. I feel it will inevitably become a CVE, as with all things.

EDIT: I suppose I could assign the remote machine a host entry in Windows' hosts file as a workaround, though that would be an extra thing to maintain should the remote machine's IP change.

Regards.