You're asking about the difference between LiveKit's

room_name

and

session_id

, and how to use each best-practice. Here’s a concise summary and recommended usage. Difference • `room_name`: developer-defined, human-readable identifier for a room. Used to group participants so they join the same shared session. Rooms are created on first join and removed when empty. • `session_id`: system-generated identifier for a single participant connection. Every time a participant joins (even the same user), a new

session_id

is issued and lasts only for that connection. Best practices • Use

room_name

for routing and user-facing organization (e.g., meeting or support-call names). Make names meaningful but avoid relying on them for long-term uniqueness. • Use

session_id

for observability, debugging, and analytics — track per-connection stats, join/leave times, and QoS data with

session_id

. • If you need globally unique, persistent identifiers for rooms over time, pair

room_name

with server-generated IDs (or append a timestamp/UUID) rather than reusing a static name. • Attach metadata (room or participant attributes) to provide context (roles, purpose) instead of overloading naming. • When querying analytics or logs, use

session_id

to pinpoint a specific participant session. If you want, I can show examples of naming patterns (timestamp vs UUID) or how to look up session details via the Analytics API. Which would you prefer? Sources: Connecting to LiveKit | LiveKit docs | Analytics API | LiveKit docs | Rooms, participants, and tracks | LiveKit docs | Avoiding Room ID Reuse When Re-Creating Rooms With the Same Name | server-sdk-ruby | livekit/livekit_composite | DeepWiki