Comments on: Get Over it: WebRTC isn’t Peer-to-Peer https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-not-p2p/ The leading authority on WebRTC Fri, 07 Aug 2020 12:35:49 +0000 hourly 1 By: Stremove.com https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-not-p2p/#comment-122880 Fri, 07 Aug 2020 12:35:49 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=10209#comment-122880 In reply to Tsahi Levent-Levi.

For this, you use a signaling server : a server that can pass messages between WebRTC clients (peers). The actual messages are plain text: stringified JavaScript objects.

]]>
By: Tsahi Levent-Levi https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-not-p2p/#comment-118417 Fri, 03 Feb 2017 14:30:36 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=10209#comment-118417 In reply to Didier.

Didier,

Yes and no. It is P2P, but most think this means no servers needed, which is plain wrong.

]]>
By: Didier https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-not-p2p/#comment-118416 Fri, 03 Feb 2017 14:27:41 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=10209#comment-118416 Maybe I’m wrong, but calling WebRTC a p2p method to share stream is basically correct. The basic operation of WebRTC is connecting stream end to end, point to point, for any project you can imagine. To take your exemple of a project expecting a massive visio chat room, clients that will use WebRTC will publish their video stream X times depending how many users are connected in the same time, resulting high bw consumption and poor video quality. I mean WebRTC is actually not for all projects, and calling it p2p seems reflect how it works basically.

]]>
By: Tsahi Levent-Levi https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-not-p2p/#comment-118415 Sun, 31 Jan 2016 18:20:31 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=10209#comment-118415 In reply to Mike Elliot.

Didn’t know if I want to mark this one as trash or spam so decided to approve it 🙂

Mike – you might want to add this service also to https://webrtcindex.com – that’s where all the world’s best implementations of WebRTC are listed.

]]>
By: Mike Elliot https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-not-p2p/#comment-118414 Sun, 31 Jan 2016 17:48:00 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=10209#comment-118414 Webrtc is fully P2P. Check out world’s best implementation of WebRTC for real time communication at https://www.letsbrik.co

]]>
By: Olivier de Jong https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-not-p2p/#comment-118413 Thu, 28 Jan 2016 21:21:49 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=10209#comment-118413 Totally agree. webRTC is way more than P2P. One can even cherrypick. Its up to you what you do with it. Phone 2 videoconferencing? Fileshare? Broadcast? All possible and you do not require black boxes of software anymore to do so

]]>
By: Dennis https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-not-p2p/#comment-118412 Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:49:38 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=10209#comment-118412 In reply to Tsahi Levent-Levi.

Makes sense. Telco community is falling behind with their traditional product life circle management.

]]>
By: Tsahi Levent-Levi https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-not-p2p/#comment-118411 Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:30:19 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=10209#comment-118411 In reply to Dennis.

Dennis, rigorous telco standard compliance = webrtc in production some time in 2030. I, for one, can’t wait that long.

]]>
By: Dennis https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-not-p2p/#comment-118410 Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:27:20 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=10209#comment-118410 Agree that it’s not all about p2p… although, having done a lot of trials, I’m still left under impression that rigorous telco standard compliance (e.g. SDP) is not of a paramount importance to, shall we say, whoever is running the show (since in p2p scenario Chrome is always going to understand Chrom etc…). It could be just my gut feeling though…

]]>
By: Tsahi Levent-Levi https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-not-p2p/#comment-118409 Thu, 28 Jan 2016 15:36:37 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=10209#comment-118409 In reply to Joe Rohde.

Joe – thanks for sharing.

To me, the fact that you choose between WebRTC and SIP shows a problem 🙂
WebRTC can fit nicely into SIP use cases by being its media engine for example – might not work with legacy, but for other use cases? Be it frequent users, large teams, whatever…

]]>