[HN Gopher] OpenVidu: Open-source, multi-platform, WebRTC videoc...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       OpenVidu: Open-source, multi-platform, WebRTC videoconferences
        
       Author : supdatecron
       Score  : 40 points
       Date   : 2020-03-17 16:59 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (openvidu.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (openvidu.io)
        
       | franga2000 wrote:
       | This looks perfect for a project I've been planning for a while,
       | but the way the pricing works seems dangerous to base a small
       | company on. They're pricing it per minute per core (even if
       | idle), as if it's a service - except that they're not providing
       | the service, I am. I'd much rather pay a flat fee than never know
       | how much I'll have to pay.
       | 
       | If they want to charge for use, fine, charge ACTIVE time, not
       | UPtime. Running a single dual-core EC2 instance should be no
       | different than running a 10-core dedicated server at 20% load.
        
       | EGreg wrote:
       | The problem with all of these is that different browsers such as
       | firefox and safari have trouble with negotiating connections.
       | 
       | For example we built the software we use on
       | https://intercoin.org/meeting or any website. It works across
       | safari on ios and chrome and we even made a workaround for
       | webviews:
       | 
       | https://mobile.twitter.com/qbixapps/status/11564841564250398...
       | 
       | But the sdp connections between the browsers fail and A can hear
       | B but C can't. Weird.
       | 
       | Zoom or Google Hangouts doesn't have such issues because they
       | always assume one specific environment. Cross browser
       | videoconferencing is not easy
       | 
       | But hey ours is open source and not locked into Twilio or these
       | guys:
       | 
       | https://github.com/Qbix/Platform
       | 
       | Search for the string WebRTC
        
       | SahAssar wrote:
       | The open-source variant does not support P2P sessions if I
       | understand it correctly, which is weird since that is half the
       | point of WebRTC.
        
         | AceJohnny2 wrote:
         | even for P2P, WebRTC most often still requires outside servers
         | for STUN/TURN, because everyone's behind a NAT of firewall.
        
           | SahAssar wrote:
           | IIRC most large scale deployments have it at around 75-95% of
           | traffic that only requires STUN (which is only used for the
           | handshake & holepunching, not for the actual traffic). TURN
           | is used for the remaining 25%-5%.
           | 
           | STUN is cheap, easy and does not require a lot of traffic.
           | TURN on the other hand requires a lot of bandwidth, which can
           | be expensive.
        
         | memco wrote:
         | Yeah, I'm a little confused about this as well. It's also not
         | clear if the demos can be used as is. I would use this for an
         | ad-hoc meeting with friends if there's no restrictions. Given
         | that they don't mention it maybe that's fine? I'd be willing to
         | go through the steps to set this up on my own server, but why
         | do I need to if this site already provides everything I need?
        
         | giancarlostoro wrote:
         | It says "without a media node", when you hover over the info or
         | "i" icon next to P2P.
        
           | SahAssar wrote:
           | Yeah, which implies that the free version routes all media
           | over the server (a media node), hence it not being P2P.
           | 
           | Not sure if you are agreeing with what I said or not?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2020-03-17 23:00 UTC)