RTCIceListener methods #71

Closed
robin-raymond opened this Issue Apr 29, 2014 · 1 comment

Projects

None yet

2 participants

@robin-raymond
Contributor

Received lots of confusion about why duplicate methods in RTCIceListener vs RTCIceTransport (e.g. onlocalcandidate) and take a look at Example 6 (April 12th editor's draft). The duplication causes too much explanation and seems to add very little if no value at all. Appears examples can be implemented entirely without RTCIceListener exposing the duplicate methods (including forking).

@robin-raymond robin-raymond added the 1.1 label Apr 29, 2014
@aboba
Contributor
aboba commented Apr 29, 2014

Agree that it appears that Example 6 could be rewritten to avoid using most of the existing RTCIceListener functionality. Could we get by with a skeletal definition as below?

[Constructor(optional RTCIceOptions options)]
interface RTCIceListener {
                attribute RTCIceOptions options;
};
@robin-raymond robin-raymond pushed a commit to robin-raymond/ortc that referenced this issue Apr 29, 2014
Robin Raymond - Fixes for error handling, as described in w3c#26
- Support for contributing sources removed (re-classified as a 1.2 feature), as described in w3c#27
- Cleanup of DataChannel construction, as described in w3c#60
- Separate proposal on simulcast/layering, as described in w3c#61
- Separate proposal on quality, as described in w3c#62
- Fix for TCP candidate type, as described in w3c#63
- Fix to the fingerprint attribute, as described in w3c#64
- Fix to RTCRtpFeatures, as described in w3c#65
- Support for retrieval of remote certificates, as described in w3c#67
- Support for ICE error handling, described in w3c#68
- Support for Data Channel send rate control, as described in w3c#69
- Support for capabilities and settings, as described in w3c#70
- Removal of duplicate RTCRtpListener functionality, as described in w3c#71
- ICE gathering state added, as described in w3c#72
- Removed ICE role from the ICE transport constructor, as described in w3c#73
3571fd1
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment