Hi! I'm the author! Feel free to ask me questions about this

VikingCoder 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

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?

▲

valorzard 3 days ago | parent [-]

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)

▲

andersmurphy 3 days ago | parent [-]

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

	▲	VikingCoder 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		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.

▲

Tepix 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

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.

	▲	valorzard 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		I'm pretty sure this still uses STUN/TURN [0], it just uses Nostr and friends as a signaling server. Again, the main stumbling block of WebRTC is the signaling server stuff. STUN/TURN is honestly pretty trivial [0] https://github.com/dmotz/trystero/blob/65fa48e33c82a7d0fa627...