-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 348
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
SFU implementation vs mesh Mirotalk #14
Comments
MiroTalk P2PRepo: https://github.com/miroslavpejic85/mirotalk Architecture: WebRTC Mesh (peer to peer between browsers) Can handle Required: Deploy: Any host that support Bonus: There is an option to use it directly from your MiroTalk SFURepo: https://github.com/miroslavpejic85/mirotalksfu Architecture: WebRTC SFU (Server with Selective Forwarding Unit) using mediasoup
Required: Deploy: Bonus: There is an Option to use it directly from your ChooseBased on the amount of users you have, you can choose the right solution for you :) I hope I have clarified your doubts about the difference of the two versions? Thanks and have a nice day. Regards |
For 👉 DISCORD 👈 - Thank you! |
Good to have this in wiki. |
Hi. As ever, thanks for sharing your impressive work. I hope you take a breather sometime too heh.
In addition to your different hosting environments for the two (Railway won't suffice for mediasoup SFU?), I'm curious as to your experience with tangible differences in the two implementations. Specifically, if one has aspirations for clubhouse like audio-centric use, might that sans-video approach work upon the mesh version? Other comparisons, based on your experience would also be interesting to learn. Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: