pthatcherg

5 ms·

1.
by pthatcherg 1y ago
I'm excited to see a major use of WebTransport!
2.
by pthatcherg 2y ago
Why don't you like libwebrtc? There's a lot of good stuff in there.
3.
by pthatcherg 2y ago
This is just an initial proposal, and probably will reduce down to one with developer feedback and implementation experience, which is normal for API development. Whether it's one shape or the other doesn't take affect the network
4.
by pthatcherg 2y ago
I'm not sure what you mean. It does work without a domain name and SSL cert.
5.
by pthatcherg 2y ago
I did something similar a while back: https://github.com/pthatcherg/stunl
6.
by pthatcherg 2y ago
WebRTC (with p2p) was done within the W3C, as was a p2p QuicTransport. And this new API is similar to the open screen APIs that have been done in the W3C. So I'm pretty sure work like this can be done in the W3C.
7.
by pthatcherg 2y ago
I was one of the original authors of the p2p QuicTansport API and the WebTransport API which is based on it. I've also recently discussed this new local p2p API with the authors. And I'm in the favor of it, at least in principle.
8.
by pthatcherg 2y ago
The article's information about WebRTC is not accurate. You can do client/server WebRTC without a "signaling server". Just make the server do the signaling. It takes a few extra round trips, but it doesn't need t
9.
by pthatcherg 3y ago
There's also WebTransport
10.
by pthatcherg 3y ago
From a server or a native client, you can send whatever RTP packets you want, but you cannot send whatever RTP packets you want from a web client, and you cannot have access to the RTP packets from a web client and do whatever you want wi
11.
by pthatcherg 3y ago
It's shame it looks like web clients won't be able to connect to each other p2p. If it supported the use of ICE+DTLS+SCTP or even ICE+QUIC, then it web clients could join in. Or am I missing something in the docs?
12.
by pthatcherg 4y ago
So WebTransport does what you were proposing to do?
13.
by pthatcherg 4y ago
It started in the W3C and the IETF group was added later. But thank you for pointing out that a lot of effort is put into making these standards a joint effort across the industry. (I was one of the original authors in the W3C but left shor
14.
by pthatcherg 4y ago
How would one add datagrams to WebSockets?
15.
by pthatcherg 4y ago
You can use ICE and QUIC together. That's what the original version of WebTransport did (back when it was called QuicTransport).
16.
by pthatcherg 4y ago
There's nothing stopping QUIC from being p2p. In fact, the original version of WebTransport was called QuicTransport and was p2p, but there was more interest in client/server use cases, so we switched focus to that. (I'm one
17.
by pthatcherg 4y ago
It's been almost 3 years since I first presented on WebTransport + WebCodecs: https://youtu.be/VD5GBLBiSxo Live streaming was a motivating example for both of those, as you can tell from the video. And both of them gr
18.
by pthatcherg 4y ago
That's correct. You can't mix without decrypting. Signal does not mix at the server because it can't. More info is available at my blog post about it: https://signal.org/blog/how-to-build-encrypted-grou
19.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
Hey, I'm the author of the Signal blog post about SFUs. I have a few questions/comments: 1. I don't think there are many good open source SFUs to choose from. I know of 2, maybe 3 (including our new one). There may be man
20.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
If you're main focus is to mostly receive 1-2 video streams while sending 0, then, yeah, I guess bundle vs non-bundle doesn't matter much. I'm pleasantly surprised to hear that 25 PeerConnections work well for you. About si
21.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
Oh, that's interesting. That's not as bad as I thought, although I am surprised that's the approach that was taken (unbundled). In that case, if you're relying on REMB from WebRTC with multiple PeerConnections, then, yes
22.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
Yes, you are right that there is also a simple loss-based congestion control mechanism ( https://github.com/jech/galene/blob/e8fbfcb9ba532f733405b1c5... ) and a min() between it and the REMB. I missed that par
23.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
I was curious and looked through the code of Galene briefly and found the following, which may partially answer your question. For context, I am familiar with the Jitsi code and have written a calling server (and written about it: https:&#
24.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
Yes, that's called "signaling". In the case of Signal, it's done through Signal messages, which pass through a server. But the server doesn't know they are calling related messages. They could be any message.
25.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
Yes, it knows the IP addresses of the clients. The other thing it knows is that you have provided a proof that you are a member of a the group conversation associated with the group call (basically a proof that you are allowed to join the c
26.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
We don't have a percentage because for 1:1 calls, we don't even know how many calls there are (it's completely p2p), but I've ofte heard quoted somewhere between 5-10% of calls. Yes, TURN is only used if needed in those
27.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
It's open source. No objection from me.
28.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
CPU usage was so very high for calls over 5-6 participants. I'm not sure what more there is too it.
29.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
Author here. We are considering making 2-person group calls switch to p2p under the hood. I don't know if that that will ever expand to 3 or more.
30.
by pthatcherg 5y ago
Author here. What is in the article is a very simplified version of the code. The code that runs in production uses many threads. See here: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Calling-Service/blob/mai...

More ›