Meet Kopano (unstable version) - a few questions & problems :)

[fbartels]

@luckow thats a nice idea. I have created a reminder for myself.

We once had a call with around 30 participants, but that was not really stable and just a quick test.

We are currently working on a sfu for some customers, if there is interest we could do a comparing test afterwards with that kind of a setup.

[scooke]

@luckow I'll join in, thanks.

[stantropics]

@jdaviescoates Have you investigated further? I have also tried to a few meetings with 3 to 5 people with several problems. Sometimes people cannot connect at all, sometimes they are not getting any sound or their sound is not transmitted to other participants. Very hard to analyze ...

[jdaviescoates]

@stantropics no not had a chance (nor really sure how to), although I think I read somewhere that with full p2p WebRTC apps like Kopano Meet all users need to have enough bandwidth for all streams or something, is that right @fbartels?

Either way it seems most people have so far had a better experience than us... So I'm keen to try more. Will attempt to join the group call..

[girish]

@luckow I will join if my home internet starts working again.

[fbartels]

@jdaviescoates said in Meet Kopano (unstable version) - a few questions & problems :

all users need to have enough bandwidth for all streams or something

Yes, with a peer to peer connection all users need to connect to each other participant. Connections in Meet are limited to max 1 Mbit per participant, if a user does not have sufficient bandwidth for that the browser will automatically reduce quality down to a level where video would be deactivated completely.

Some more usage questions are answered in https://kopano.com/blog/top-10-things-to-ask-about-kopano-meet/

[avatar1024]

@jdaviescoates said in Meet Kopano (unstable version) - a few questions & problems :

with full p2p WebRTC apps like Kopano Meet all users need to have enough bandwidth for all streams or something

is a nice explanation of the pros and cons of the three main typologies used for video conference: p2p / MCU / SFU

[avatar1024]

Also might be of interest:

An article which test a methodology to compare SFUs, and then test a few of them. Results probably do not reflect real case scenario though.

[scooke]

Sorry for not participating, had some connectivity issues here. How did the call go?

[msbt]

you didn't miss it, it's this evening

[scooke]

@msbt Ah, I had the already-converted time in my head, "9", and then misremembered it as 'am'. Phew.

[girish]

That went pretty well! Thanks for joining and @luckow for organizing.

[jdaviescoates]

@girish @luckow how many people did it get up to? I wanted to join but alas was having a nightmare of a children's bedtime instead!

[scooke]

@jdaviescoates Seven. One left their video off. We had three reconnections but those were momentary and the reconnection initially resulted in clearer video images each time.

[yusf]

How resource-intensive was the session? Was the beefy spec justified?

[imc67]

Hi all, today I introduced Kopane Meet for the first time in our (volunteers) organization for a video meeting with 1 account and 5 guests.

It was a disaster! After half an hour trying and frustration we stopped and 4 of them started a WhatsApp groupvideo (Whatsapp has a max of 4?!).

What went right?
The first 2 persons (account and 1 guest) succeeded in having audio and video.

What went wrong?
All other guests could join (we could see their names) but they didn't see any video or heared audio and the first two didn't see/hear them. They could see themselves in their browser.

Time to uninstall the app and hopefully Jitsi Meet will be here soon.

[yusf]

Sounds like my experience with Kopano. Maybe you can describe device types, browsers and network topology used? I suspect some of the problems derives from part network restrictions but also weak devices and faulty browsers.

[stantropics]

@imc67 It also sounds exactly like my experience with Kopano meet. I'm trying to analyze whether the problem is somewhere on my side - however, it appears to be a real challenge.

[imc67]

@yusf of some I know their devices/browsers:

1. account: MacOS+Safari = all fine (could see/hear 2.)
2. guest: MacOS+Safari = all fine (could see/hear account, BTW on same network as account)
3. guest: MacOS+Safari and iPad+Safari = connected, could see himself, but no audio/video to/from others
4. guest: iPad+Safari = connected, could see himself, but no audio/video to/from others
5. guest: Samsung tablet with Chrome = connected, could see himself, but no audio/video to/from others
6. guest: ? = connected, could see himself, but no audio/video to/from others

The WhatsApp groupvideo after half an hour strugling with four (2./3./4./5.) went perfect, so it's not a matter of bandwith I guess.

Cloudron server load or bandwith usage during the "call" was normal, so no increase in CPU resources or network (I use ZABBIX agent on the Cloudron server so can see all stats live and all history is stored).

[necrevistonnezr]

off-topic: I think one lesson to learn here is that to do video conferencing properly is quite hard. You can hate on Zoom and Teams all you want but if you actually have your work depend on it (e.g. meeting with a client, like I do on a daily basis), it's quite a different story than just having fun with friends.