Cloudron makes it easy to run web apps like WordPress, Nextcloud, GitLab on your server. Find out more or install now.


Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Bookmarks
  • Search
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

Cloudron Forum

Apps | Demo | Docs | Install
  1. Cloudron Forum
  2. Kopano Meet
  3. Meet Kopano (unstable version) - a few questions & problems :)

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

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Solved Kopano Meet
kopanomeetup
54 Posts 14 Posters 7.7k Views 15 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • girishG Offline
    girishG Offline
    girish
    Staff
    wrote on last edited by
    #42

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

    jdaviescoatesJ 1 Reply Last reply
    3
    • girishG girish

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

      jdaviescoatesJ Offline
      jdaviescoatesJ Offline
      jdaviescoates
      wrote on last edited by
      #43

      @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! 😛

      I use Cloudron with Gandi & Hetzner

      scookeS 1 Reply Last reply
      1
      • jdaviescoatesJ 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! 😛

        scookeS Offline
        scookeS Offline
        scooke
        wrote on last edited by
        #44

        @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.

        A life lived in fear is a life half-lived

        1 Reply Last reply
        1
        • yusfY Offline
          yusfY Offline
          yusf
          wrote on last edited by
          #45

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

          1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • imc67I Offline
            imc67I Offline
            imc67
            translator
            wrote on last edited by
            #46

            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.

            S 1 Reply Last reply
            1
            • yusfY Offline
              yusfY Offline
              yusf
              wrote on last edited by
              #47

              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.

              imc67I 1 Reply Last reply
              2
              • imc67I 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.

                S Offline
                S Offline
                stantropics
                wrote on last edited by
                #48

                @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.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • yusfY 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.

                  imc67I Offline
                  imc67I Offline
                  imc67
                  translator
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #49

                  @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).

                  fbartelsF 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • necrevistonnezrN Offline
                    necrevistonnezrN Offline
                    necrevistonnezr
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #50

                    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.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • imc67I 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).

                      fbartelsF Offline
                      fbartelsF Offline
                      fbartels
                      App Dev
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #51

                      Hi @imc67,

                      browser versions are equally as important as the browser itself. and sadly Safari isn't the best when it comes to supporting modern standard such as PWAs and WebRTC. The general recommendation would be to use Chrome or Chromium based browsers.

                      @imc67 said in Meet Kopano (unstable version) - a few questions & problems 🙂:

                      Cloudron server load or bandwith usage during the "call" was normal

                      Yes, that is to be expected when using WebRTC, the majority of traffic is between individual callers. There are still some connections to the server, like for example a websocket connection to kwmserver for notifications and then of course the connection to the turn server.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      • luckowL Offline
                        luckowL Offline
                        luckow
                        translator
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #52

                        Charming participants at the first (virtual) Cloudron meetup 🙂

                        kopano-meet.jpg

                        Pronouns: he/him | Primary language: German

                        O 1 Reply Last reply
                        4
                        • luckowL luckow

                          Charming participants at the first (virtual) Cloudron meetup 🙂

                          kopano-meet.jpg

                          O Offline
                          O Offline
                          oj
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #53

                          @luckow We should do this again when @fbartels packages "Kopano Meet Boost" on Cloudron!

                          "Kopano Meet Boost is a server that we offer to our enterprise customers to meet this challenge. It is a Selective Forwarding Unit (SFU) that receives only one data stream from the sender and forwards it to all other participants. This drastically reduces the required computing power at the client and saves bandwidth. Thus, video meetings are also possible with 50 and more participants."

                          https://github.com/Kopano-dev/kwmbridge

                          fbartelsF 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • O oj

                            @luckow We should do this again when @fbartels packages "Kopano Meet Boost" on Cloudron!

                            "Kopano Meet Boost is a server that we offer to our enterprise customers to meet this challenge. It is a Selective Forwarding Unit (SFU) that receives only one data stream from the sender and forwards it to all other participants. This drastically reduces the required computing power at the client and saves bandwidth. Thus, video meetings are also possible with 50 and more participants."

                            https://github.com/Kopano-dev/kwmbridge

                            fbartelsF Offline
                            fbartelsF Offline
                            fbartels
                            App Dev
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #54

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

                            packages "Kopano Meet Boost" on Cloudron

                            thats unfortunately a bit impractical to do. kwmbridge requires a large range of udp ports so running it in a container with forwarded ports is quite inefficient (because there is also quite a memory overhead in Docker in this case).

                            But it should be easy to make the app configurable enough to have kwmbridge running on a dedicated host and simply hook up to kwmserver inside of the app. having (multiple) external kwmbridge endpoints is kind of the setup we are expecting anyways.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            2
                            Reply
                            • Reply as topic
                            Log in to reply
                            • Oldest to Newest
                            • Newest to Oldest
                            • Most Votes


                            • Login

                            • Don't have an account? Register

                            • Login or register to search.
                            • First post
                              Last post
                            0
                            • Categories
                            • Recent
                            • Tags
                            • Popular
                            • Bookmarks
                            • Search