Re: Specify the negotiationneeded event from Justin Uberti on 2015-02-13 (public-webrtc@w3.org from February 2015)

From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 18:10:12 -0800
To: "piranna@gmail.com" <piranna@gmail.com>
Cc: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>, Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, public-webrtc <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-2UQLJ7UqnUcz-hsftO7nWO-nWX-RXRGDwhjR_NJAVPEw@mail.gmail.com>

No, I don't think we should try to be clever like that. Please read my
email regarding when we should/should not fire onNN.

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 4:56 PM, piranna@gmail.com <piranna@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > I wanted to clarify. As far as I know Chrome currently fires two
> > negotiationneeded events when removeTrack is immediately followed by
> > addTrack. Is this going to change based on this specification and only
> one
> > negotiationneeded event will be fired?
>
> It should fire only one, and in a second iteration/implementation
> detail/left for a future specification, being so smart to detect the
> inverse operation (addTrack/removeTrack) leading to the same previous
> state and don't dispatch it at all since nothing changed.
>
>
> --
> "Si quieres viajar alrededor del mundo y ser invitado a hablar en un
> monton de sitios diferentes, simplemente escribe un sistema operativo
> Unix."
> – Linus Tordvals, creador del sistema operativo Linux
>

Received on Friday, 13 February 2015 02:11:00 UTC