continuwuation/continuwuity

Fork 80

MatrixRTC native support checklist #1432

New issue

Open

opened 2026-02-21 13:12:32 +00:00 by nex · 6 comments

nex commented

2026-02-21 13:12:32 +00:00

Owner

Tip

While this checklist details things that are necessary for full native support for MatrixRTC, MatrixRTC works fine without any server-side co-operation at the time of writing.

MatrixRTC: MSC4143 (rendered)

MSC4354: Sticky Events (rendered)
MSC4140: Cancellable delayed events (rendered)
Ideally a native livekit JWT service (integrating jwt-service-rs into the server directly)

> [!TIP] > While this checklist details things that are necessary for *full native support* for MatrixRTC, **MatrixRTC works fine without any server-side co-operation** at the time of writing. MatrixRTC: [MSC4143](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/4143) [(rendered)](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/toger5/matrixRTC/proposals/4143-matrix-rtc.md) - [ ] [MSC4354: Sticky Events](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/4354) [(rendered)](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/kegan/persist-edu/proposals/4354-sticky-events.md) - [ ] [MSC4140: Cancellable delayed events](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/pull/4140) [(rendered)](https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/toger5/expiring-events-keep-alive/proposals/4140-delayed-events-futures.md) - [ ] Ideally a native livekit JWT service (integrating [jwt-service-rs](https://github.com/JadedBlueEyes/jwt-service-rs) into the server directly)

nex added the

labels

2026-02-21 13:12:32 +00:00

benbot commented

2026-02-21 15:34:48 +00:00

Contributor

I could at least help getting some confit options in to populate the .well-known responses with the rtc info :)

Henry-Hiles commented

2026-02-21 15:37:38 +00:00

Contributor

I think .well-known isn't meant to be used for MatrixRTC anymore, though Element Call still uses it? So the new endpoint needs to be implemented also?

👍 1

benbot commented

2026-02-21 16:24:12 +00:00

Contributor

@Henry-Hiles wrote in #1432 (comment):

I think .well-known isn't meant to be used for MatrixRTC anymore, though Element Call still uses it? So the new endpoint needs to be implemented also?

Then what’s the endpoint for the application info?
I thought that was still going to be in the well-known somewhere.

I couldn’t find it from skimming the MSC

@Henry-Hiles wrote in https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/issues/1432#issuecomment-24730: > I think .well-known isn't meant to be used for MatrixRTC anymore, though Element Call still uses it? So the new endpoint needs to be implemented also? Then what’s the endpoint for the application info? I thought that was still going to be in the well-known somewhere. I couldn’t find it from skimming the MSC

Henry-Hiles commented

2026-02-21 16:25:57 +00:00

Contributor

@benbot wrote in #1432 (comment):

@Henry-Hiles wrote in #1432 (comment):

I think .well-known isn't meant to be used for MatrixRTC anymore, though Element Call still uses it? So the new endpoint needs to be implemented also?

Then what’s the endpoint for the application info? I thought that was still going to be in the well-known somewhere.

I couldn’t find it from skimming the MSC

Looks like /_matrix/client/v1/rtc/transports

@benbot wrote in https://forgejo.ellis.link/continuwuation/continuwuity/issues/1432#issuecomment-24731: > @Henry-Hiles wrote in #1432 (comment): > > > I think .well-known isn't meant to be used for MatrixRTC anymore, though Element Call still uses it? So the new endpoint needs to be implemented also? > > Then what’s the endpoint for the application info? I thought that was still going to be in the well-known somewhere. > > I couldn’t find it from skimming the MSC Looks like `/_matrix/client/v1/rtc/transports`

Jade commented

2026-02-21 16:26:34 +00:00

Owner

https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/toger5/matrixRTC/proposals/4143-matrix-rtc.md#discovery-of-rtc-transports

benbot commented

2026-02-21 16:38:47 +00:00

Contributor

That’s for the RTC transports, not the RTC application types.

github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals@7907635a54/proposals/4143-matrix-rtc.md (matrixrtc-application-types)

That’s for the RTC transports, not the RTC application types. https://github.com/matrix-org/matrix-spec-proposals/blob/7907635a54080fd35739910818e26f5d6edbe8c3/proposals/4143-matrix-rtc.md#matrixrtc-application-types