- From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 08:25:22 +0000
- To: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 2016-03-17 08:44, Adam Bergkvist wrote: > Hi > > We have two pieces of information in an ice candidate to identify a > m-line sdpMid and sdpMLineIndex. > > The successful case is when both identifiers points to the same m-line > or if one identifies an m-line while the other is null. > > We have the following uncertain/error cases > 1. Both are set, one identifies an m-line while the other is bogus. > 2. Both are set and point to different m-lines. > 3. One is set, and points to an non-existent m-line (clearly an error). > > So the first question is: what should we do in 1 and 2? > > The second question is where this should be specified. addIceCandidate() > is specified to do some synchronous checks on the candidate argument and > then start a 'process to apply' the candidate. We could either check for > the above errors in the synchronous section and specify it in the > webrtc-pc document. The alternative is to let these checks be part of > the 'process to apply' candidate and let the error be asynchronously > reported to JavaScript. In the second case, JSEP would need to specify this. I just realized that the addIceCandidate() I describe above (with a synchronous section and the 'process to apply' candidate) is not yet released. You find it on the master branch in the github repo. Sorry for that. /Adam
Received on Thursday, 17 March 2016 08:25:59 UTC