W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > June 2012

Re: DataConnection objects

From: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 05:51:32 -0400
Message-ID: <4FD862A4.8090809@jesup.org>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 6/13/2012 4:29 AM, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 12 June 2012 23:19, Stefan Hakansson LK
> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>  wrote:
>> I still am not convinced about the need for this DataConnection object.
>> Since there will be only one DataConnection per PeerConnection, there is a
>> one-to-one mapping between them. What do the app developer (on anyone else)
>> gain by us introducing the DataConnection object?
>
> This is only good if you assume that every PeerConnection has a data connection.

I'm not convinced we need the DataConnection object.  Anything you can 
do to one could be a method on PeerConnection.

It makes it a little clearer if you want to drop all DataChannels.
It gives you a convenient API/handle for finding out and keying off the 
state of the DataConnection/SCTP association (if it matters).
It might be useful in some other context than PeerConnection.

-- 
Randell Jesup
randell-ietf@jesup.org
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2012 09:52:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:28 UTC