Comments on: What Twilio’s NTS Service Means to WebRTC Developers and to Other WebRTC API Platform Vendors

By: Tsahi Levent-Levi

Tsahi Levent-Levi — Wed, 16 May 2018 17:36:02 +0000

That’s up to you to some extent.

CPaaS means a lot less hassle when it comes to developing and maintaining a service. It comes at a price that is usually usage based.

If you are contemplating the alternative, then CPaaS is probably the better approach for you.

By: silentlogic

silentlogic — Wed, 16 May 2018 15:33:40 +0000

In reply to Tsahi Levent-Levi. Sorry I could not explain well. I needed to ask if we have to face million users concurrently in future then should we choose to hire TURN/STUN from any vendor or choose to buy PaaS

By: Tsahi Levent-Levi

Tsahi Levent-Levi — Wed, 16 May 2018 12:59:50 +0000

In reply to silentlogic.

I am not sure about the differences between Twilio’s NAT Traversal service and the XirSys one. You should ask the vendors directly why you should use one and not the other.

For me, both should be fine and frankly – I never heard any complaints about either of them (doesn’t say that everyone’s happy, just the people who talked to me).

By: silentlogic

silentlogic — Wed, 16 May 2018 12:47:26 +0000

In reply to silentlogic. just adding. We have to go for video chat only.

By: silentlogic

silentlogic — Wed, 16 May 2018 12:45:18 +0000

Hi, We have a webRTC application using some ordinary free STUN/TRUN. Now we have to go live with hundreds of thousands of users by embeding our webRTC chating app into our another application which is being used heavily. We expect much load. So should we hire Twilio’s STUN/TURN or should we go for some Paas services directly? Please suggest if Xirus is better option.

By: Rajmohan

Rajmohan — Thu, 04 Dec 2014 08:31:23 +0000

We have been providing a similar service – http://www.seamconnect.com for long now. But as you said, Twilio will hopefully attract more WebRTC developers and we get to see some adoption.

By: Tsahi Levent-Levi

Tsahi Levent-Levi — Wed, 26 Nov 2014 12:51:52 +0000

In reply to Philipp Hancke.

Philipp,

You can run such a service in your garage, but that would be different than Twilio doing the same thing. It is a matter of scale and attention.

Twilio solving it sends a different message to the industry than MNS doing the same.

By: Philipp Hancke

Philipp Hancke — Wed, 26 Nov 2014 00:08:27 +0000

http://www.medianetworkservices.com/ has been offering such a service for quite a while so what is the news? Ok, they don’t mention WebRTC anywhere…

By: Tsahi Levent-Levi

Tsahi Levent-Levi — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 15:02:19 +0000

In reply to Aswath Rao.

Aswath,

That’s exactly the point I was trying to make – Twilio offers voice only services today. This is their first foray into the realm of video.

By: Aswath Rao

Aswath Rao — Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:23:26 +0000

What would a NAT Traversal Service have to do extra/differently to support video? Isn’t it just a function of the transfer rate? If it is based on cloud architecture that is already built-in? TIA