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

Ericsson open-sources OpenWebRTC, rival to Google’s WebRTC implementation

gigaom.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 51 posts

Re: Ericsson open-sources OpenWebRTC, rival to Google’s WebRTC implementation

#31

Post by gz5 »

jallmann wrote: post #24
neom wrote: post #11

I've spent quite a lot of time looking at how OTT providers have impacted traditional SIP stack technologies. Ericsson are one of the few major tech I know companies that have understood that the future is heavily reflected in software definition. I strongly believe companies like Ericsson will surely make some game changing technologies over the next 2-5 years, their bread and butter has traditionally been reliant o…

There is a lot of hubaloo over WebRTC in the telecom space, because there's nothing else happening there. Traditional V/VoIP has been stagnant since people started doing video chat using large TVs a decade ago, calling it telepresence. WebRTC is another feature to check off, and the opportunity to develop and sell another SIP gateway product. WebRTC is in no way a replacement for SIP, much less an existential threat…

Technology has historically confined us to communications = telecom, but really telecom is just a branch of comms, and a branch that is best for a very specific set of use cases.

WebRTC enables communications as a feature - a very different set of use cases. Use cases that are directly embedded in other applications and workflows.

Also, by publishing the APIs, and baking much of the technology into the browsers (regardless if it is WebRTC, ORTC, etc.), WebRTC helps democratize communications service development by lowering the barrier to entry and the cost of development. This will help lead to comms apps we haven't even thought of yet, or don't yet have a reason to exist.

Re: Ericsson open-sources OpenWebRTC, rival to Google’s WebRTC implementation

#32

Post by jgrowl »

jephir wrote: post #22
pthatcherg wrote: post #14

Chrome WebRTC developer here. Two quick thoughts: 1. A better headline would be "Ericsson open-sources another WebRTC implementation". WebRTC is a set of standards, and they are implementing them, which is one of the purposes of having standards: to have multiple implementations. 2. One of the purposes listed by Ericsson for having another implementation is to "transcend the pure browser environment and that native a…

A few months ago, I tried building the Google WebRTC implementation, but got an error about missing Java libraries. I'm not sure why Java is needed to build a C++ API, even then, requiring Oracle Java 6 and not working with OpenJDK. Ericsson's implementation, on the other hand, has a much simpler build process. Just run the shell script and it works.

I am pretty sure Java is only needed to build the Java wrapper. There may be a build target or a flag you can use to avoid this.

I'll agree Ericsson's implementation is simpler, but maybe not as robust.

Re: Ericsson open-sources OpenWebRTC, rival to Google’s WebRTC implementation

#33

Post by neom »

gz5 wrote: post #31
jallmann wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of hubaloo over WebRTC in the telecom space, because there's nothing else happening there. Traditional V/VoIP has been stagnant since people started doing video chat using large TVs a decade ago, calling it telepresence. WebRTC is another feature to check off, and the opportunity to develop and sell another SIP gateway product. WebRTC is in no way a replacement for SIP, much less an existential threat…

Technology has historically confined us to communications = telecom, but really telecom is just a branch of comms, and a branch that is best for a very specific set of use cases. WebRTC enables communications as a feature - a very different set of use cases. Use cases that are directly embedded in other applications and workflows. Also, by publishing the APIs, and baking much of the technology into the browsers (rega…

Google fiber could kill traditional telco and traditional sip, if the speed and stability rivals that of a sip network, then google could become a utility I'd imagine, as I believe the ability to reliably deliver "tone" and provide access to emergency services are the only things lacking in voip today. The telcos shouldn't just be scared of the application layer, they should be scared of what the application layer has begun to do in the physical.

Traditional telco will die within the next 6 years if they don't innovate, I'd bet my bottom dollar on it. I believe this move from Ericsson is the beginings of them pulling the telco industry forward - knowing fine well how reliant they are on it. If this isn't part of a bigger picture play, then teclo as we know it and their vendors (all of you) are done.

Re: Ericsson open-sources OpenWebRTC, rival to Google’s WebRTC implementation

#35

Post by jallmann »

gz5 wrote: post #31
jallmann wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot of hubaloo over WebRTC in the telecom space, because there's nothing else happening there. Traditional V/VoIP has been stagnant since people started doing video chat using large TVs a decade ago, calling it telepresence. WebRTC is another feature to check off, and the opportunity to develop and sell another SIP gateway product. WebRTC is in no way a replacement for SIP, much less an existential threat…

Technology has historically confined us to communications = telecom, but really telecom is just a branch of comms, and a branch that is best for a very specific set of use cases. WebRTC enables communications as a feature - a very different set of use cases. Use cases that are directly embedded in other applications and workflows. Also, by publishing the APIs, and baking much of the technology into the browsers (rega…

Not disagreeing with you. Learning a new JavaScript API is much more accessible than waddling through the morass of VoIP standards. But ultimately, that's all WebRTC is -- an API specification with MTIs for media handling that are going to look antiquated in a decade.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with that -- tooling makes all the difference in the world, and the reason WebRTC is catching is because the right substrate for RTC is finally available in the browser. What's missing in the dialogue is that WebRTC only solves a small subset of the problems that V/VoIP addresses. They are complementary technologies, but not substitutes -- we'll be seeing a lot of reinventing the wheel and rediscovering the same mistakes in the years to come.

Re: Ericsson open-sources OpenWebRTC, rival to Google’s WebRTC implementation

#36

Post by jmspring »

pthatcherg wrote: post #15
jmspring wrote: post #7

One of the biggest issues in the whole WebRTC process has been getting companies to commit to documenting the minimum SDP for interop. I'm curious how well these two implementations will interop. One of the reasons for ORTC is to remove signaling from the specification.

Signalling is already removed from the WebRTC API. ORTC doesn't change that. All would change is not needing to use SDP as the API surface. But that's API surface, not signalling.

signaling/api surface, easy enough for me to not be precise in my terminology, that said, there is still no agreement to produce an rfc/draft with agreed to sdp for an independent implementation.

Re: Ericsson open-sources OpenWebRTC, rival to Google’s WebRTC implementation

#37

Post by jallmann »

neom wrote: post #33
gz5 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technology has historically confined us to communications = telecom, but really telecom is just a branch of comms, and a branch that is best for a very specific set of use cases. WebRTC enables communications as a feature - a very different set of use cases. Use cases that are directly embedded in other applications and workflows. Also, by publishing the APIs, and baking much of the technology into the browsers (rega…

Google fiber could kill traditional telco and traditional sip, if the speed and stability rivals that of a sip network, then google could become a utility I'd imagine, as I believe the ability to reliably deliver "tone" and provide access to emergency services are the only things lacking in voip today. The telcos shouldn't just be scared of the application layer, they should be scared of what the application layer ha…

What exactly would you replace SIP with? Hangouts? Skype? Another proprietary OTT solution? Please, no.

Are you confusing SIP with the public switched telephone network? They are two very different things; SIP can be used to signal PSTN traffic, among many, many more things. "Killing" a completely open, functioning communications standard just because it doesn't share the same acronym as the hotness of the moment is extremely shortsighted.

I do agree on two things: carriers should not be in the business of providing services on top of last-mile delivery, and any said services really need to be modernized. Eg, provision public URIs alongside phone numbers, let my phone register with my own SIP proxy rather than the carrier's IMS gateway, QoS guarantees for video calls and other media, etc.

Re: Ericsson open-sources OpenWebRTC, rival to Google’s WebRTC implementation

#38

Post by jgrowl »

jephir wrote: post #22
pthatcherg wrote: post #14

Chrome WebRTC developer here. Two quick thoughts: 1. A better headline would be "Ericsson open-sources another WebRTC implementation". WebRTC is a set of standards, and they are implementing them, which is one of the purposes of having standards: to have multiple implementations. 2. One of the purposes listed by Ericsson for having another implementation is to "transcend the pure browser environment and that native a…

A few months ago, I tried building the Google WebRTC implementation, but got an error about missing Java libraries. I'm not sure why Java is needed to build a C++ API, even then, requiring Oracle Java 6 and not working with OpenJDK. Ericsson's implementation, on the other hand, has a much simpler build process. Just run the shell script and it works.

Oh, also... I forgot I created an ansible playbook on ansible-galaxy a couple weeks ago that builds Google's webrtc implementation:

https://github.com/jgrowl/ansible-galaxy-webrtc

It will build the JAR target but that will build the .so file as part of the process.

Re: Ericsson open-sources OpenWebRTC, rival to Google’s WebRTC implementation

#40

Post by pthatcherg »

tharshan09 wrote: post #27
pthatcherg wrote: post #14

Chrome WebRTC developer here. Two quick thoughts: 1. A better headline would be "Ericsson open-sources another WebRTC implementation". WebRTC is a set of standards, and they are implementing them, which is one of the purposes of having standards: to have multiple implementations. 2. One of the purposes listed by Ericsson for having another implementation is to "transcend the pure browser environment and that native a…

I am curious. How did you come to work on the WebRTC stack for Chrome?

I applied to Google. They hired me. I worked on Google Talk and Hangouts for many years. WebRTC was related and interesting, so I worked on various parts (such as the data channels) in my 20% time. After a while, I liked it so much I chose to make it my 100% time.
Post reply on HN