Worth installing at home?

I’m wondering if it’s worth the energy to run a Jitsi server from my home. I’m not a coder/developer, or even in the tech industry. Previous attempts to use apps Docker from my Win10 machine failed. I don’t have access to a Static IP with my current internet plan, and my upload speeds are only 12Mbps.

Not having a static IP is a problem and 12Mbps upload will fit in 3 participants in HD … you may have bad audio/video quality …

Thanks for the fast reply.

My meetings are only 1 on 1, for clients who live in the area. Current service (paid) I think limits video bandwidth (resolution and fps) to make sure the audio is stable, which is what I need. But I was curious if I could tinker with the audio settings even further. But it wouldn’t be worth paying for a server, since it’s close enough to server costs and doing what I need it to do anyways without putting any sweat equity into something I know little about. Just curious if it was worth trying to tinker with to see if I could build/run something myself. But yeah, no static IP for consumer level internet plans in the area.

I don’t know where you’re based or who your service provider is, but it is customary for service providers in the US to pretty much leave customers on the same IP address. So although it’s not contractually static, it pretty much functions as one.

Also, since Jitsi resolution is done via FQDN, perhaps not having a static IP address is not a complete limiter. So long as your changing IP is resolving to your FQDN (there are simple ways of ensuring this), people will always be able to reach your Jitsi application.

If you ask for my honest overall assessment, it’s soooooooooo worth it! Of course, in your case, it might be easier for you to just use the public Jitsi instance at meet.jit.si, but believe me, the control you have over your environment from hosting your own server is worth the try. And the Quick Install Guide is like magic - gets you up and running in no time at all! Try it - if for nothing else, to broaden your horizon, so the next time you have to write or comment on something like this, you can factually instead say “ALTHOUGH I’m not a coder/developer or even in the tech industry…” :smile:

The problem with static address is on every ip change you need to restart and jvb.

Even with an IP resolver (or what it’s called)? I can probably search for the information, but I think what I gathered earlier in my journey was that you have these nifty tools/applications that you can run that will automatically detect IP changes on a set FQDN and resolve them to the FQDN so that whenever a call is made to the FQDN, it always returns a positive response. So, in my mind, I’m thinking if the FQDN is the ‘entry’ point to a Jitsi installation, so long as that FQDN doesn’t change, the application should always be available. Is my thinking incorrect?

yes but jvb needs the public ip address so every time the FQDN resolver (duc) updates the public ip, you’d need to reconfigure jvb and restart it. Seems perfectly doable though.
And 1 to 1 calls use p2p so it doesn’t really put much strain on the server, so I guess it could be a raspberry pi?

Nope, also jvb needs to know it to announce it in signalling. Discovery is done at the moment automatically using a stun request on jvb boot.

Aaaaaaah, got it! :+1:t5:

Yeah, I think it’s very doable too. I have a home installation (although, I’m running it on an actual baremetal), which I only turn on when we have a meeting. If the OP only plans to turn the server on when they have a scheduled meeting, I don’t know that there is a real risk of an IP change (JVB will pick up current IP on boot). IP change occurs when the IP is released (through restart e.t.c…)

The ip you pick up on boot is the internal ip address, not the public one, unless you configure a script to use the public one? but idk, I only use the docker installation and only in an isolated local network.

It is discovered through stun https://github.com/jitsi/jitsi-videobridge/blob/8a42be70ca8fcaa217931b607865223cea154947/debian/postinst#L109

1 Like