[Galene] Re: Heads-up: built-in TURN server

["Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>]

Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> writes:

>> What about when the external TURN server is on a different IP, so Galene
>> has no problem starting up the internal one, but it's firewalled off to
>> clients can't connect to it? In that case presumably it'll just be
>> another TURN candidate offered to clients which will fail?
>
> The external TURN server will be tried first, so the latency of successful
> connections will not increase.  You'll just take more time to fail.

Right, OK.

>> (I think Firefox emits a warning recommending a max of two candidates)?
>
> Yeah, I'm not sure why.  I see no reason for that in the ICE spec, but
> perhaps Firefox are doing proprietary magic.
>
> At any rate, I'd expect somebody who goes through the trouble of setting
> up an instance of coturn to be willing to add a command-line option to
> Galène.  I'd like to understand why you and Michael appear to disagree,
> perhaps I'm missing something obvious.

Sure, I can add it, of course :)

It's just a bit of extra work; specifically, I have to go in and update
the systemd unit file on update, and if I wasn't paying attention to the
mailing list I would likely have missed this addition and end up running
with a "broken" config.

And also, from a "least surprise" PoV I think it's a bit odd to
second-guess the user: if I configured a list of TURN servers, I would
expect that that is the list that would be used, and not have it amended
without an explicit opt-in.

Just to be clear, I think turning on the TURN server by default is
totally fine to make it easier to deploy Galene! It's only the "override
user config" aspect I'm objecting to (and it's not a terribly strong
objection, at that).

-Toke