W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > December 2014

Re: onicegatheringstatechange VS onicecandidate with candidate==null (just one of them, please)

From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 23:01:29 +0100
Message-ID: <CALiegf=VdKKcA5NRxeHsUjATX8i5QxyXTrAWAH+=6CCjVH76+w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
2014-12-27 22:51 GMT+01:00 Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>:
> I'm not convinced this is a good idea.

It is not an idea, it is what it is written in the latest draft:

http://w3c.github.io/webrtc-pc/#widl-RTCPeerConnection-onicegatheringstatechange



> The null candidate lets an implementation
> simply send the candidates to the other side and the null candidate can be
> used to know that no more candidates are coming. That seems simpler than
> having a special app affordance to indicate this.

The latest draft also states:


-----------------------
If the intent of the ICE Agent is to notify the script that:

- The gathering process is done.
Set connection's ice gathering state to completed and let newCandidate be null.
----------------------

So we have two events to say the same. Obviously one of them is redundant.


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>
Received on Saturday, 27 December 2014 22:02:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:42 UTC