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

Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

blog.chromium.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 183 posts

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#11

Post by 0x0 »

loeg wrote: post #7
IgorPartola wrote: post #3

Imagine how much more awesome this will be when we also have IPv6. We will have no more need for things like ICE [1], just direct point to point communication. Oh, and multicast for giant video chat sessions. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_Connectivity_Establ...

Multicast on the internet is a nice dream. Will it actually happen with IPv6? My understanding is there is a barrier to adoption ­— basically all routers involved need to be aware of the multicast initiation/join/leave protocol, and basically, there's a bunch of old hardware/software out there that isn't aware. Is all IPv6-capable hardware capable of this (given that IPv6 came out in ... 1998)?

I had the impression that the biggest hurdle for multicast to happen on the internet is the insane memory requirements for routers to track all the multicast memberships (as well as being extremely open for abuse -- imagine one client subscribing to every multicast stream out there and never leaving, that would flood the incoming pipes for that ISP)

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#12

Post by dbaupp »

I feel like DataChannels are the best part of the WebRTC standard (or would be, if they were usable): a true p2p connection allowing transfer of arbitrary data without plugins or anything. This gives multiplayer games, file transfers, realtime chat and collaborative editors (let your imagination run wild...) and the only thing a server is required for is establishing the connection (and saving state). This functionality is much more exciting than simple video or audio chat.

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#13

Post by FuzzyDunlop »

dbaupp wrote: post #12

I feel like DataChannels are the best part of the WebRTC standard (or would be, if they were usable): a true p2p connection allowing transfer of arbitrary data without plugins or anything. This gives multiplayer games, file transfers, realtime chat and collaborative editors (let your imagination run wild...) and the only thing a server is required for is establishing the connection (and saving state). This functional…

I agree, and it's easy to tell just in the way you can describe it. The first thing video/audio chat brings to mind to anyone is 'Skype in the browser'. That's still cool and there is definitely more potential than that, but just having an arbitrary connection is a lot more open ended and exciting.

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#14

Post by UnoriginalGuy »

Looks neat.

One thing I wonder about tech' like this, is that it is encrypted from you to the service, but there is no assurance of privacy.

Someone who runs a service like this can easy drop in on your calls and ease-drop. Which is a legitimate concern if someone wanted to use this either in a corporate environment or for very private calling (e.g. husband and wife, doctor and patient, etc).

No current video tech' really offers much in the way of assured privacy. Skype used to but it has been largely rolled back since Microsoft took over.

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#16

Post by untog »

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #14

Looks neat. One thing I wonder about tech' like this, is that it is encrypted from you to the service, but there is no assurance of privacy. Someone who runs a service like this can easy drop in on your calls and ease-drop. Which is a legitimate concern if someone wanted to use this either in a corporate environment or for very private calling (e.g. husband and wife, doctor and patient, etc). No current video tech' r…

My understanding is that it's possible to not have a 'service' and instead form connections from one person directly to another. That decentralization would be a privacy boon.

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#19

Post by isaacwaller »

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #14

Looks neat. One thing I wonder about tech' like this, is that it is encrypted from you to the service, but there is no assurance of privacy. Someone who runs a service like this can easy drop in on your calls and ease-drop. Which is a legitimate concern if someone wanted to use this either in a corporate environment or for very private calling (e.g. husband and wife, doctor and patient, etc). No current video tech' r…

I believe WebRTC is peer to peer.

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#20

Post by comex »

dbaupp wrote: post #12

I feel like DataChannels are the best part of the WebRTC standard (or would be, if they were usable): a true p2p connection allowing transfer of arbitrary data without plugins or anything. This gives multiplayer games, file transfers, realtime chat and collaborative editors (let your imagination run wild...) and the only thing a server is required for is establishing the connection (and saving state). This functional…

Unfortunately, if this page is accurate, DataChannels don't really work yet:

http://www.webrtc.org/chrome#TOC-Data-Channels-

A shame, because I have a use in mind for them. :)

Post reply on HN