Jitsi Meet – Improving Scale and Media Quality with Cascading SFUs (2018) • Hacker News Board

Re: Jitsi Meet – Improving Scale and Media Quality with Cascading SFUs (2018)

#31

Post by APock » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 3:38 PM UTC

tych0 wrote: post #16

dergachev wrote: post #15

I've been excited to try it with our company for a few months, but is it as "user friendly" as Zoom for non-technical users?

Load a URL on your computer. No accounts, no software. IMO, yes.

People really undervalue the awesomeness of not having to set up an account to use an online service.

Re: Jitsi Meet – Improving Scale and Media Quality with Cascading SFUs (2018)

#32

Post by oever » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 3:42 PM UTC

moron4hire wrote: post #22

I've been playing with a custom install of Jitsi Meet for the last few days. It was very easy to setup. I'm kind of fearing trying to deploy it in my company. This has nothing to do with Jitsi Meet and everything to do with the shitshow that is WebRTC in browsers. I can't find any desktop browsers that use the available GPU for hardware accelerated video encoding. Chromium (Google and Edge) says it's "only available…

What's the setting for hardware video encoding in Firefox? media.webrtc.hw.h264.enabled or media.webrtc.platformencoder?

Re: Jitsi Meet – Improving Scale and Media Quality with Cascading SFUs (2018)

#33

Post by hyperluz » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 3:45 PM UTC

Too bad, like most other solutions, Jitsi, by default, shares screen at 5 FPS.

Re: Jitsi Meet – Improving Scale and Media Quality with Cascading SFUs (2018)

#34

Post by corwin7 » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 3:55 PM UTC

I tried installing this on two different Ubuntu machines using their Ubuntu repo and it did not work. Worked fine on both Android and Ios. This is about what I expect from a java application - the java ecosystem is co convoluted and fragile that the only real options are Android, Ios, and Docker. I wish someone would write something like this in Go or Rust.

Re: Jitsi Meet – Improving Scale and Media Quality with Cascading SFUs (2018)

#35

Post by cryptonector » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 4:00 PM UTC

Can someone expand the SFU acronym? I chased the link to sfu-tagged blogs at TFA and an expansion is nowhere to be found.

EDIT: Thanks!

Re: Jitsi Meet – Improving Scale and Media Quality with Cascading SFUs (2018)

#36

Post by detaro » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 4:01 PM UTC

cryptonector wrote: post #35

Can someone expand the SFU acronym? I chased the link to sfu-tagged blogs at TFA and an expansion is nowhere to be found. EDIT: Thanks!

non-intuitively at the end of first section:

> Selective Forwarding Units (SFU)

Re: Jitsi Meet – Improving Scale and Media Quality with Cascading SFUs (2018)

#37

Post by toohotatopic » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 4:02 PM UTC

SparkyMcUnicorn wrote: post #23

hirako2000 wrote: post #4

It's a fantastic open source solution. Can be self hosted. It is to note that traffic does go through the server, hence need decent bandwidth. the server afaik does have the keys to decrypt traffic

The Jistsi team says the server needs roughly 5.5Mbps per Chrome user. Firefox uses a lot more bandwidth, system resources, and degrades the room capacity. Just something to keep in mind, and after some testing I saw the same results. My AWS bill was projected to be over $1k/month, so I put it on Linode where it'll cost between $100-200/month. Just about any decent VPS provider would be good options compared to AWS d…

Is there cheaper bandwidth available than Hetzner's 1.19euro +vat per TB? (Linode seems to be at 10$ / TB).

Re: Jitsi Meet – Improving Scale and Media Quality with Cascading SFUs (2018)

#38

Post by ianmcgowan » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 4:03 PM UTC

cryptonector wrote: post #35

Can someone expand the SFU acronym? I chased the link to sfu-tagged blogs at TFA and an expansion is nowhere to be found. EDIT: Thanks!

Looks like it's a WebRTC acronym: https://webrtcglossary.com/sfu/

SFU stands for Selective Forwarding Unit.

At times, the term is used to describe a type of video routing device, while at other times it will be used to indicate the support of routing technology and not a specific device.

An SFU is capable of receiving multiple media streams and then decide which of these media streams should be sent to which participants.

Re: Jitsi Meet – Improving Scale and Media Quality with Cascading SFUs (2018)

#39

Post by toohotatopic » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 4:07 PM UTC

SparkyMcUnicorn wrote: post #29

Something that isn't mentioned in the docs is room (and server) capacity, or at least rough estimates. The Jitsi team gave some specific numbers on room capacity in the forums. Each room should reliably handle 20-35 Chrome users (Firefox uses roughly double the resources), and has a cap at 75. Apparently if you're only using audio, then rooms of 70+ people will work fine. They're working on upping this number to 500…

Where does the difference between Chrome and Firefox come from? Is Firefox using a different video format?

Re: Jitsi Meet – Improving Scale and Media Quality with Cascading SFUs (2018)

#40

Post by gidam » Thu, Apr 02, 2020, 4:14 PM UTC

Jitsi-meet is very easy to install and to setup. "apt install jitsi-meet" and you have almost all done. The documentation is very good. It works great and it is super userfriendly. You have no excuses.