- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 11:05:44 +0200
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
- Message-ID: <55892168.2070500@alvestrand.no>
On 06/23/2015 12:14 AM, Peter Thatcher wrote: > > > > 2. What states should we have in DtlsTransport.state? I have > new/connecting/connected/closed/failed, which closely matches > both the ICE state and the ORTC DtlsTransportState. However, > the ORTC state does not have "failed", whereas the ICE state > does. So, I included "failed" even though it's missing in ORTC > (or rather, closed the purpose of failed as well). > > > Well, it certainly can fall, so it should have a state. > > > Yes, but the question is not "should failure have state", but > rather "should failure have the closed state, or a separate 'failed'" > state. ICE has a separate "failed" state, so having one would be more > consistent with ICE. > ICE actually has 3 relevant states: - "failed" - we never got there, expectation is that it will not heal - "disconnected" - something broke, may or may not heal itself - "closed" - JS deliberately went out and closed it (The state diagram shows arrows both ways between "failed" to "disconnected"; I'm not sure whether that arrow is real or not - can't quite imagine why that should be allowed to happen). If reflecting that in DtlsTransport, it would be - "failed" - something's wrong, we won't retry - "disconnected" - something's wrong, we're retrying - "closed" - (since we don't have a close() function, what does it mean?)
Received on Tuesday, 23 June 2015 09:06:15 UTC