On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> > wrote: > >> On 06/23/2015 10:38 PM, Peter Thatcher wrote: >> >> Does DtlsTransport really have a "disconnected"/retrying state? I >> guess we could make it "disconnected" any time the underlying IceTransport >> is disconnected, but that adds complexity. What value do we gain to make >> it worthwhile? >> >> >> I don't know DTLS well enough to say..... I'm sure there are states where >> the ICE connection is working fine, but traffic isn't getting through >> because something's wrong at the DTLS layer - it would be important to >> clearly identify that we're in that state. >> > > The question is whether that's a temporary state or permanent state. If > permanent, just use the "failed" state. > > I don't know of any such temporary situations with DTLS. > That's correct. -Ekr > > >> Otherwise, the fewer states the better. >> > > Yes, the only downside is that the JS then needs to check both > DtlsTransport.state and DtlsTransport.transport.state to know the full > state. I think I'm OK with that, but it's worth recognizing the tradeoff. > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2015 21:15:15 UTC