Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WebRTC is almost here, and it will change the web

venturebeat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 93 posts

Re: WebRTC is almost here, and it will change the web

#31

Post by zanny »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #10
AndrewDucker wrote: post #2

At the moment, NAT means that lots of connections have to go through a central server, at least to set up the connection. With IPv6, that need should vanish (providing you aren't firewalled by your router). The two things combined should remove a lot of middlemen.

IPv6 does not mean the end of NAT, and WebRTC ROAP or JSEP already have ICE style STUN/TURN traversal mechanisms. (4 months ago I had a demo working using ROAP and STUN before they switched to JSEP. I'm literally in the middle of upgrading it to the new API.) The "setup" for the connections in the central server is trivial with a tiny websockets server and a few messages shuttled back and forth.

Holy acroynm city batman.

Re: WebRTC is almost here, and it will change the web

#32

Post by shawndumas »

"This is the most significant step forward in web browser connectivity since 2004, when Google launched Gmail and AJAX was coined."

Microsoft --> AJAX[1]. And yes, I know that they aren't saying that Google --> AJAX but it kinda leaves that impression.

----

http://garrettsmith.net/blog/archives/2006/01/microsoft_inve...

Re: WebRTC is almost here, and it will change the web

#33

Post by matsiyatzy »

phase_9 wrote: post #11

Yet another HTML5 "Game Changer" which has already been available as part of the Adobe Flash Platform[1] for the best part of three years. Just saying :) For those down-voting me; I find this attitude very strange. If the tools were present in another widely deployed runtime, but were heavily under utilised then why are people getting so excited about them this time around? I guess some people just love to hate Flash…

Well, it's usually very hard to copy other people's flash code that you might see somewhere. With webRTC/javascript, all you really need to do is "view source". This, plus mashups with other web APIs, makes webRTC a much more powerful platform than flash.

Re: WebRTC is almost here, and it will change the web

#34

Post by isnotchicago »

dustismo wrote: post #4
barista wrote: post #3

>This is the most significant step forward in web browser connectivity since 2004, when Google launched Gmail and AJAX was coined That's not quite right. Microsoft invented XMLHTTP, the interface which XHR is based on, in '98 or '99 for Outlook Web Access.

Notice that he said "AJAX was coined" in 2004 not that the technology was invented.

In the parent's defense, the rest of that paragraph and the chart below it downplay Microsoft's role in favor of Google's, which could be viewed as "not quite right".

Re: WebRTC is almost here, and it will change the web

#35

Post by thebigshane »

vectorpush wrote: post #30

Look, you're kidding yourself if you think that WebRTC is going to liberate you from the prying eyes of government surveillance. As a developer, I'm very excited about the possibilities that WebRTC enables (websockets just can't cut it in many instances), but computer science is not a panacea for political apathy. P2P is nothing new, and anybody who cares to secure their online communications can already do so with e…

Please explain how I can have a secure online conversation with my mother easily. (Easy for me, easy for her). Is it going to involve setting up my own trusted server somewhere? Is it going to involve downloading some large undocumented project and have to build myself (on my box and her box)? Is it going to require troubleshooting arcane protocols, firewalls, and xml files?

I haven't seen an easy way to have secure email (without teaching the other side of the conversation cryptography), secure voip/voice (without the trouble above), or secure chat (without using my own server).

I'm not saying easy ways don't exist; I'm saying I don't know what or where they are.

Re: WebRTC is almost here, and it will change the web

#36

Post by metaxyy »

I can't tell what they mean by this: "If all goes according to plan, over 50% of all web browsers will support this capability in the next three to four months."

There are only five browsers that count, so why didn't they just say "three of the five major browsers?" Or, if they mean more than 50% of browser installations, are we really at the point where we can get 50% of all browser installations updated within a couple of months?

Re: WebRTC is almost here, and it will change the web

#37

Post by mtgx »

metaxyy wrote: post #36

I can't tell what they mean by this: "If all goes according to plan, over 50% of all web browsers will support this capability in the next three to four months." There are only five browsers that count, so why didn't they just say "three of the five major browsers?" Or, if they mean more than 50% of browser installations, are we really at the point where we can get 50% of all browser installations updated within a co…

Yes, I think Chrome and Firefox can achieve that within 3-4 months.

Re: WebRTC is almost here, and it will change the web

#38

Post by thebigshane »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #10
AndrewDucker wrote: post #2

At the moment, NAT means that lots of connections have to go through a central server, at least to set up the connection. With IPv6, that need should vanish (providing you aren't firewalled by your router). The two things combined should remove a lot of middlemen.

IPv6 does not mean the end of NAT, and WebRTC ROAP or JSEP already have ICE style STUN/TURN traversal mechanisms. (4 months ago I had a demo working using ROAP and STUN before they switched to JSEP. I'm literally in the middle of upgrading it to the new API.) The "setup" for the connections in the central server is trivial with a tiny websockets server and a few messages shuttled back and forth.

For reference for others:

NAT (Network Address Traversal): exposing only your router's ip address and hiding your own to outside traffic [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_address_translation]

ROAP (RTCWeb Offer/Answer Protocol): main voice protocol [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTCWeb_Offer/Answer_Protocol]

JSEP (JavaScript Session Establishment Protocol): protocol for setting up P2P connection [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript_Session_Establishme...]

Following are all technologies for punching through NAT...

ICE (Interactive Connectivity Establishment): [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_Connectivity_Estab...]

STUN (Session Traversal Utilities for NAT): [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STUN]

TURN (Traversal Using Relays around NAT): [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traversal_Using_Relay_NAT]

(Disclaimer: I know nothing of these technologies, I just looked them up on wikipedia myself)

Re: WebRTC is almost here, and it will change the web

#39

Post by taligent »

metaxyy wrote: post #36

I can't tell what they mean by this: "If all goes according to plan, over 50% of all web browsers will support this capability in the next three to four months." There are only five browsers that count, so why didn't they just say "three of the five major browsers?" Or, if they mean more than 50% of browser installations, are we really at the point where we can get 50% of all browser installations updated within a co…

Chrome + Firefox are around 60% of current browser installations and both currently self-update so that is likely where he got that figure.

It does neglect to mention that not all Firefox browsers do self-update so that would need to be factored in.

Re: WebRTC is almost here, and it will change the web

#40

Post by taligent »

thebigshane wrote: post #35
vectorpush wrote: post #30

Look, you're kidding yourself if you think that WebRTC is going to liberate you from the prying eyes of government surveillance. As a developer, I'm very excited about the possibilities that WebRTC enables (websockets just can't cut it in many instances), but computer science is not a panacea for political apathy. P2P is nothing new, and anybody who cares to secure their online communications can already do so with e…

Please explain how I can have a secure online conversation with my mother easily. (Easy for me, easy for her). Is it going to involve setting up my own trusted server somewhere? Is it going to involve downloading some large undocumented project and have to build myself (on my box and her box)? Is it going to require troubleshooting arcane protocols, firewalls, and xml files? I haven't seen an easy way to have secure…

No offence but I don't think the government could possibly care less about you or the conversation with your mother. There is a long list of far more important and interesting people for them to worry about.

How about using whatever is the easiest, most enjoyable and trouble free setup for her to use.

Post reply on HN