Re: Summary of API for ICE State Reporting

On 08/26/2012 06:58 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) wrote:
>
> I've tried to distill a bunch of the ICE state conversation into a 
> proposal for the API to discuss on the conference call. Slides attached.
>
> We probably need between 25 and 45 minutes on the conference call to 
> sort this out

Cullen,

in your proposal B - is this intended to be equivalent to having 3 
separate Booleans that can be queried, with events triggering whenever 
one of them changes state?

In the case when you have 3 ICE state machines, the first one is in 
Connected, the second one is in Checking, and the third one goes from 
Checking to Connected, I think you're saying that there will be an event 
triggered, but none of the booleans change state - so I guess not.

Would the events have to carry information about the transport they 
refer to in order to be useful? If so, would we have to expose a 
transport abstraction up to the PeerConnection interface to support that 
abstraction?

So far, we've managed to not do that. This could change.

                    Harald