VikingCoder a day ago

You specifically mention:

"Server dependence: You need to host or use two different servers (Signaling + STUN/TURN). Can use Google’s STUN, but combining signaling and STUN into one server would be nice."

I'm curious about using Tailscale with this. I don't think you can just do Tailscale Funnel? But maybe you could? Maybe Tailscale Share, and the client has to also be on Tailscale?

I feel like they would go really well together...

Thoughts?

Reply View 3 replies
  • valorzard a day ago

    So, having talked to people in the WebRTC community about this, you should be able to use WebRTC in a local network without having to connect to STUN/TURN

    STUN/TURN matters because if you are connecting to a remote peer, you have no idea how to reach them. STUN/TURN gives you a "map" to get to the remote peer.

    If you are on a VPN that doesn't matter very much (see: Hamachi)

    Reply View 2 replies
    • andersmurphy 19 hours ago

      Yeah if you know the ip of your peer you don't need STUN/TURN from what I remember.

      Reply View 1 reply
      • VikingCoder 15 hours ago

        If it's ipv6, I think that's true. If it's ipv4, then you still have problems. They could be behind NAT or worse, CGNAT.

        Reply View 0 replies
Tepix a day ago

Have you looked at Trystero https://oxism.com/trystero to establish the WebRTC connection? I used it on a small PoC last week and it worked well. Thanks to latching on to various decentralized services (Nostr etc) you don’t need your own TURN/STUN server etc.

Reply View 1 reply