Signal-Calling-Service
azure-ubuntu-jitsi
Our great sponsors
Signal-Calling-Service | azure-ubuntu-jitsi | |
---|---|---|
4 | 3 | |
410 | 13 | |
0.5% | - | |
8.6 | 1.8 | |
about 1 month ago | about 2 years ago | |
Rust | Makefile | |
GNU Affero General Public License v3.0 | MIT License |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
Signal-Calling-Service
-
Is async runtime (Tokio) overhead significant for a "real-time" video stream server?
I am npt sure if this is related but Signal built Signal Calling Service and according to them it worked great.
-
Pyrite – open-source video conferencing
I was curious and looked through the code of Galene briefly and found the following, which may answer your question. For context, I am familiar with the Jitsi code and have written my own calling server (and written about it: https://signal.org/blog/how-to-build-encrypted-group-calls/).
Galene appears to be less mature than Jitsi. For example, it uses REMB feedback messages from the client to calculate allowable bitrates rather than calculating the bitrates itself (as Jitsi and Signal's SFU do). Worse, it appears that what it does with that information is erroneous. I could be wrong, but it looks like the bitrate allocation code (see https://github.com/jech/galene/blob/e8fbfcb9ba532f733405b1c5...) only allocates the bitrate for one of the video streams, not all of them. Perhaps the author did not realize that there is one REMB sent back for all the video streams by WebRTC rather than one per stream (see, for example, here: https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:thi...). Further, I find the spatial layer switching code to be strange. For examples, it doesn't go down a layer unless it's 150% over the estimated allowable bitrate, which gives a lot of opportunity for inducing latency.
In short, I think Galene has a ways to go before it works as well as Jitsi (Videobridge), and thus Pyrite group calls are unlikely to work as well as Jitsi group calls (for 1:1 calls, I don't know; I didn't look into that).
Oh, and just a reminder, the SFU we use for Signal group calls is also open source: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Calling-Service.
-
How to build large-scale end-to-end encrypted group video calls
And yeah, it uses Signal-Calling-Service written on Rust.
-
An Introduction to WebRTC Simulcast
That's a well written article covering the basics of simulcast.
If you're interested in seeing an implementation of an SFU doing simulcast forwarding written in Rust, we (at Signal) recently open sourced our SFU:
https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Calling-Service/blob/mai...
azure-ubuntu-jitsi
-
Ask HN: Any good open source video conferencing options?
Yep. Ran one during most of the pandemic: https://github.com/rcarmo/azure-ubuntu-jitsi
-
Galène Videoconference Server
I have been running Jitsi Meet (https://meet.jit.si/) for a little over a year[1] for a group of friends to do their monthly meetings during the COVID times, and tried this out a little while ago.
I liked it, but there is still a fair amount of assemby required, and I hope they get it to the point where (like Jitsi) everything is a docker-compose away.
[1]: https://github.com/rcarmo/azure-ubuntu-jitsi - all my tweaks, ready to deploy
-
Pyrite – open-source video conferencing
The most interesting thing for me is actually the galene server, but playing around with the demo server and looking at the documentation it seems to be a fair bit behind Jitsi in ease of use and deployment.
(I built a one-shot template to deploy and run Jitsi on Azure - https://github.com/rcarmo/azure-ubuntu-jitsi - and it's been trivial to maintain over the past two years, for a small group of friends and monthly "open sessions")
I'm not enamored of the Pyrite UI (again, Jitsi seems simpler), but I'll keep an eye on both.
What are some alternatives?
galene - The Galène videoconference server
rtp - A Go implementation of RTP
jibri - Jitsi BRoadcasting Infrastructure
pyrite - Pyrite is a web(RTC) client & management interface for Galène SFU
Jitsi Video Bridge - Jitsi Videobridge is a WebRTC compatible video router or SFU that lets build highly scalable video conferencing infrastructure (i.e., up to hundreds of conferences per server).
BigBlueButton - Complete open source web conferencing system.
pyright - Static Type Checker for Python
talk - Group video call for the web. No signups. No downloads. [Moved to: https://github.com/vasanthv/tlk]
jitsi-meet-electron - Jitsi Meet desktop application powered by :electron:
obsninja - VDO.Ninja is a powerful tool that lets you bring remote video feeds into OBS or other studio software via WebRTC.