Signal-Calling-Service
Jitsi Video Bridge
Our great sponsors
Signal-Calling-Service | Jitsi Video Bridge | |
---|---|---|
4 | 2 | |
410 | 2,851 | |
0.5% | 1.0% | |
8.6 | 8.5 | |
about 1 month ago | 4 days ago | |
Rust | Kotlin | |
GNU Affero General Public License v3.0 | Apache License 2.0 |
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...
Jitsi Video Bridge
-
Is async runtime (Tokio) overhead significant for a "real-time" video stream server?
I've been looking at open source video conferencing software options, specifically Jitsi. When reading their deployment docs the phrase "real time" comes up occasionally, for example:
-
Zoom Video adding advertisements to the free tier of its service
It stops being peer-to-peer as soon as there are more than two participants (i.e more than one destination for the stream). Jitsi uses their Videobridge https://jitsi.org/jitsi-videobridge/ as a central server to do the multiplexing.
What are some alternatives?
galene - The Galène videoconference server
Jitsi Meet - Jitsi Meet - Secure, Simple and Scalable Video Conferences that you use as a standalone app or embed in your web application.
rtp - A Go implementation of RTP
Mumble - Mumble is an open-source, low-latency, high quality voice chat software.
pyrite - Pyrite is a web(RTC) client & management interface for Galène SFU
Rocket.Chat - The communications platform that puts data protection first.
azure-ubuntu-jitsi - A private Jitsi videoconferencing set up on Azure
Zulip - Zulip server and web application. Open-source team chat that helps teams stay productive and focused.
Mattermost - Mattermost is an open source platform for secure collaboration across the entire software development lifecycle..
Centrifugo - Scalable real-time messaging server in a language-agnostic way. Self-hosted alternative to Pubnub, Pusher, Ably. Set up once and forever.
Lets-Chat - Self-hosted chat app for small teams
Tuber - Peer-to-Peer Video Chat for Corporate LANs