F/OSS Multi-Point Video-Conferencing

DarkSarin writes "Given that solutions like iChat can seamlessly video-conference for multiple parties on the Mac, and that others are semi-commercial, like Oovoo (which recently left beta and is no longer free for more than 3-way calls), what do you recommend in terms of a F/OSS solution to a need for moderate-sized video-conferencing? Ideally, it would be something which does not use a web-page and does not require hours of configuration. iChat is insanely easy to use. Mebeam.com is also quite simple to operate, but requires so much screen real estate that it can't easily be used in conjunction with any other software. Referring to other documents while in the middle of the conference is nice, but it's important to have the reactions of the other participants — and not everyone has multiple monitors. I am aware of projects like vmukti and services like ustream.tv, but I am thinking more in terms of a stand-alone application that is F/OSS (Ekiga/GnomeMeeting comes to mind, but it does not do multi-point video chat unless one also has access to an H.323 gateway, which is apparently non-trivial to implement). With the prevalence of broadband connections, I am surprised that a solid effort is missing for making easy, painless multi-point video-conferencing for more than 3 or 4 connections (which seems to be the most that a lot of 'free' solutions offer, or even the low-cost ones). So, my question is two-fold: First, why isn't there a better effort at medium to large video-conferencing that pretty much anyone can set up? Second, do you know of any F/OSS applications which work well and support a minimum of 6 to 8 connected parties?"

Comments

FreeSWITCH can do Video Conf.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.freeswitch.org

Re:FreeSWITCH can do Video Conf.

[lowlands]

Please read the comment more carefully. FreeSWITCH is not FreePBX nor Asterisk. It's Asterisk done right and then some. More info about FreeSWITCH is at http://www.freeswitch.org/ and joining #freeswitch at irc.freenode.net will get you in touch with a very helpful community ready to answer your questions. Try it, be amazed, contribute, and enjoy!

VLVC might solve your problem

[Anonymous Coward]

VLVC is an end of studies project realized in EPITECH. Its main goal is to developp a videoconference module for the VLC software.

http://www.vlvc.net/en-home.html

Skype?

[Goeland86]

I know Skype isn't FOSS, but the latest Linux beta for skype does video chat with windows.
I was pleasantly surprised when I tried it last week from my linux platform.
It also does n-way calls. And runs on Linux, Windows and Mac. Something to follow up on?

Re:Skype?

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with Skype is that it really is completely proprietary (not just the client, but also the protocol) and you have no way to guarantee that you can still use it anymore in a year or two...

Re:Skype?

[Tack]

Luckily, using Skype isn't something that is likely to create vendor lock-in. So when a viable OSS alternative becomes available in the future, switching to it will involve about the same amount of effort as it would if that software had existed today.

So if the options are using Skype now and switching in 2 years (say), or using nothing for 2 years and waiting for something to come along, the former option seems more agreeable.

Re:Skype?

[Anonymous Coward]

Luckily, using Skype isn't something that is likely to create vendor lock-in. So when a viable OSS alternative becomes available in the future, switching to it will involve about the same amount of effort as it would if that software had existed today.

That makes no sense. Once something becomes a defacto standard it is nearly impossible to get everyone to switch to something else. Market share is everything. This is exactly how Microsoft maintains their monopoly. It is the reason the vast majority of people use Windows. It is the reason the vast majority of businesses use Microsoft Office. It is the reason everyone uses MP3s instead of Ogg Vorbis; and GIF instead of PNG. It is also the reason no one uses IPv6.

Due to networking externalities, Skype is exactly the sort of thing that is likely to create vendor lock-in.

Re:Skype?

[Anonymous Coward]

but it doesn't do n-way video conferencing, which is partially what the post was about (the other was that it be a F/OSS app)

Re:Skype?

[pizzach]

Skype can't do 3 way video conferencing, which is what the original poster was asking for. (I know, I've tried.)

Re:Skype?

[Tack]

The reason Microsoft maintains a monopoly with Office is because its grip on the market perpetuates and expands due to proprietary formats. Skype deals with transient data, so the analogy to Office, or MP3, or GIF (or any other kind of file format) doesn't work.

I also don't quite understand your point about networking externalities. In fact, as I see it, because Skype sort of Just Works through firewalls and doesn't typically require any explicit configuration, any OSS product which also Just Works for the same reason could be used without involving any networking changes.

I understand what you're saying about the risk of Skype being a de facto standard, but this is different from monopolostic vendor lock-in because the initial "expense" of deploying Skype is roughly equivalent to the later "expense" of deploying some OSS alternative. (Maybe that initial expense is a bit less, but it's eclipsed by the benefits of being able to actually do the video conferencing in the interim.)

Re:Skype?

[Tack]

Yes, but the network effect doesn't invariably result in lock-in.

My point is that with something like Skype, you're dealing with transient data, the software itself requires very little configuration (and no configuration generally needed outside of the software [e.g. networking]), and usage of the software doesn't require a lot of training. The barrier to replacement is, compared to other examples, really fairly low.

All that's really required is that you agree with those you want to conference with to use a given piece of software, and then install it. This is an obstacle, but it's not a substantial one. Because this effort is roughly equivalent to the original effort of agreeing to use and installing Skype, the I disagree with the lock-in argument.

Nobody disagrees that the ideal situation is to use OSS if some viable candidate exists. If it doesn't, all I'm arguing is that using something like Skype -- if it provided the necessary capabilities (which apparently it doesn't, but that's moot for this discussion) -- is a sensible stop-gap. In this particular case, I don't accept that the implied alternative (use nothing while you wait for an OSS solution) is the best option. (Sometimes it might be.)

VIC and RAT

[TheRaven64]

VIC allows arbitrary numbers of people to join in a videoconferencing session. It fails the 'easy to use' test, but could probably be used as the basis for an application that doesn't.

Re:VIC and RAT

[Ice Wewe]

Given that the newest package listed on their site is from 2003, I might consider a different project. Gnomemeeting is one option, however I haven't found it to be that user friendly. You could use GTalk, assuming they all have Google accounts.

http://www.mebeam.com/ has a plug-in for GTalk that allows for multi-way video conferencing.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/5qdp38 (Link to the plug-in)

h323

[Lord Byron II]

Any h323 client will do the job, like Ekiga (formerly GnomeMeeting). Also, for those in the science community, evo.caltech.edu is a nice Java-based collaboration tool.

..uhm..can't find an answer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't find any. There are several open source SIP/Voice tools but with Multi-point nope.... Ekiga/GnomeMeeting - http://ekiga.org/ ZAP - http://croczilla.com/zap SFLPhone - http://www.sflphone.org/ OPenWengo - http://www.wengophone.com/ Can anyone list some one? or should the community should try to evolve this projects ?

IRC

[johannesg]

You kids these days with your graphical user interfaces! Just go with the One True Unix Way: command line! It is quick, it is easy, and it works on VT100 terminals over a 14k4 modem. Why would you need anything more?

All you need to do is set up an IRC-server in multi-pointcast mode using the -nrl option, and then connect to it with reverse protocol multiplication using the -t option. You can add new users by typing :nusername:ip;port:macaddress;. Trivial.

Re:IRC

[flyingfsck]

...and the ASCII Art codec...

Re:IRC

[hostyle]

Correct. One is a huge waste of time and bandwidth, the other isn't.

Re:IRC

[Nikker]

I think if IRC is ok then it would just be sent as an email.

Re:IRC

[ryszard99]

damn you kids with your fancy acoustic coupler. back in my day we used fire and blankets, now get off my lawn!

audience?

[story645]

First, why isn't there a better effort at medium to large video-conferencing that pretty much anyone can set up? Probably 'cause it's assumed that the only people really need medium/large video-conferencing software are universities and companies-and they can afford proprietary software, so why try too hard?

AccessGrid? VRVS?

[Anonymous Coward]

Accessgrid:

Works fine, even supports multipoint *HD* video conferencing, open source though the "hours to set up" depends on your tech competence. It doesn't *need* working multicast, but works a lot better with it.

Not really AG-specific: Also note that multipoint video conferencing requires either echo cancellation (and ALL software echo cancellation sucks, you need still need hardware DSP units even in 2008) or headsets for everyone - one bad node can ruin they meeting - if you think an echoey 2-way conversation is bad, you should experience a 15-way conference some time (though that might need academic/military bandwidth :-) )

http://accessgrid.org/

EVO? (Successor to VRVS).

Kind of new, but descendant of VRVS. Kind of a cut-down accessgrid. Easy to use, though is web-page based.

AFAIK, like VRVS, interoperates with AccessGrid, though participants in a conference tend to be "second class citizens".

http://evo.caltech.edu/evoGate/FAQ/index.jsp#Basics01

software echo cancellation

[TheSHAD0W]

Not really AG-specific: Also note that multipoint video conferencing requires either echo cancellation (and ALL software echo cancellation sucks, you need still need hardware DSP units even in 2008) or headsets for everyone - one bad node can ruin they meeting - if you think an echoey 2-way conversation is bad, you should experience a 15-way conference some time (though that might need academic/military bandwidth :-) )

Just curious - why should "software" echo cancellation suck? The DSP-based cancellation *is* software, just on a DSP. Modern CPUs ought to have enough horsepower to perform the same function reasonably quickly, yes? No?

Re:software echo cancellation

[btempleton]

They do. The latest skype's echo cancellation is very good and done in software. They are also doing 640x480 at 24-30 fps, which is broadcast video quality, if you have the bandwidth and CPU for it. (about 800kbits up and a dual core.)

re: evo

[danpritts]

see http://www.accessgrid.org/software - this is "vic & rat" as mentioned above.

which is from the people who went on to do evo.

It can be non-trivial to make it work but it fits the rest of your requirements pretty well. It's gotten more user friendly in the last few years goo.

If your network supports multicast, AG will use it, which means you don't need a central server. This mostly means R&E networks, there is very little multicast availability on the commercial internet.

VLC Http Interface?

[Doomedsnowball]

What about VLC? It has it's own little web server and customizable http interface. It is trivial to host a page with multiple VLC windows running streaming from remote webcams. I know because I have been given such ridiculous tasks from clients. VLC is so flexible and open, it's not much work to customize it using only basic HTML and Javascript knowledge. Throw in a little AJAX and PHP and you have your shared whiteboard and an upload function. Simple, really.

Open Meeting?

[Olmy's Jart]

http://code.google.com/p/openmeetings/

No experience with it, I just happened to be looking at the freshmeat announcement a couple of days ago.

Features:
        * Video/Audio
        * See Desktop of any participant
        * Multi-Language and Customizable
        * Whiteboard with drawing, write & edit, dragNDrop, Resizeing, Images (DragNDrop from Library), Symbol(s)
        * Conference while drawing (4x4 or 1xn modus)
        * Safe Drawings / whiteboard and load it next time, edit and resave
        * Import Documents (.tga, .xcf, .wpg, .txt, .ico, .ttf, .pcd, .pcds, .ps, .psd, .tiff, .bmp, .svg, .dpx, .exr, .jpg, .jpeg, .gif, .png, .ppt, .odp, .odt, .sxw, .wpd, .doc, .rtf, .txt, .ods, .sxc, .xls, .sxi, .pdf) DocumentImporting

        * Send invitation and direct Links into a meeting
        * Moderating System
        * User-/Organisation-/Moderating- System
        * Backup and Language Module (LanguageEditor, BackupPanel)
        * Private and Public (Organisation only) Conference-Rooms
        * Technologies used, see TechnologyPortfolio

H323 not multipoint, EVO not functional

[Roger W Moore]

H.323 fails the multipoint test - there is an old project OpenMCU which used to provide some sort of multipoint linkup for H.323 but it never seemed to get beyond an early alpha stage.

EVO is horrible. It's JAVA+vic/rat. Quality is terrible, it is really slow to connect each time and you can't always connect. It is supposed to be the VC tool of choice for the LHC experiments. However it is so bad that almost every meeting I attend uses the CERN telephone conferencing in preference or the ESNET H.323 MCU which the Tevatron experiment (D0 and CDF) use.