W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > January 2014

Re: Server-oriented stack (Was: Summary (updated)...)

From: Gili <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:38:41 -0500
Message-ID: <52E92081.2080404@bbs.darktech.org>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
I had no idea any of these implementations existed before you guys 
mentioned them. I think what would help if we listed these (and other) 
implementations off webrtc.org and/or Wikipedia to help users find these 


On 29/01/2014 10:33 AM, Lorenzo Miniero wrote:
> Il giorno Wed, 29 Jan 2014 15:35:36 +0100
> Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> ha scritto:
>> Hey all,
>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 3:25 AM, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Missing server-oriented version of WebRTC
>>> Multiparty, recording, broadcast
>> I was wondering if we had a plan as to how exactly we were going to
>> take on these two (if at all). The reason I am asking is because I
>> think we might already have most of the components in place within the
>> Jitsi community (FOSS):
>> * media stack and srtp support with libjitsi (with DTLS from
>> bouncycastle)
>> * ICE support with ice4j.org
>> * a video router (SFU) with Jitsi Videobridge
>> The one part that's currently missing is recording ... but we
>> shouldn't be long...
>> None of the above components rely on any part of the existing
>> webrtc.org stack, which should also address the interoperability
>> concerns that otherwise arise with the dominance of  single RI.
>> (FWIW, I do agree that working on formally specifying any part of the
>> server-side APIs here would be rather out of scope)
>> Emil
>> --
>> https://jitsi.org
> I guess that to complete the Java-based picture Emil described,
> gstreamer-java could be used to implement recording: although
> gstreamer-java only supports gstreamer 0.10 and not the newer, more
> stable 1.x, it already implements stuff that may be used for the
> purpose (RTP, VP8/Opus, transcoding, file formats, etc.).
> Anyway, just FYI I'm working on a WebRTC server implementation myself as
> well. Since it's completely written in C, it doesn't make use of any
> webrtc.org code either. The idea was to write a general purpose gateway
> that only took care of the protocols, and then leave the application
> logic to server-side plugins, which is what I've been working on so far
> lately. It's not ready yet, but it will be open source (github
> probably) which should hopefully help in widening the range of
> plugins/applications based on it, including recording, broadcasting and
> so on.
> That said, I agree with Emil that a server-side API is not really
> required. After all, the concept behind WebRTC is that there's no
> client and so server, just peers: the logic behind the peer (be it an
> application or a person) is really out of scope.
> Lorenzo
Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2014 15:39:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:38 UTC