[libnice] Inquiry re: commit 1ab9d7c104, “conncheck: Separate valid and succeeded states"

[Chad Phillips]

Olivier,

I’m on vacation this week, I’ve added testing this patch to my todo list
for when I get back, thanks for looking into it!

Chad

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 5:03 AM, Lorenzo Miniero <lminiero at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2017-04-12 0:00 GMT+02:00 Olivier Crête <olivier.crete at collabora.com>:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can you try testing this branch? and let me know how it works for you?
>>
>> https://git.collabora.com/cgit/user/tester/libnice.git/log/?h=bellet
>>
>>
>
> Hi Olivier,
>
> thanks for the quick patch!
>
> I asked my colleagues to test this, and it looks like it fixes the issue
> in one scenario (Janus on AWS), but it doesn't in another (Janus in a
> docker container with a bridge network, which behaves like a symmetric
> NAT), where both were working fine with 0.1.13. For the sake of
> completeness, though, the scenario where it still doesn't seem to work,
> doesn't work with D735 either, so not sure what this means there.
>
> Thanks,
> Lorenzo
>
>
>
>> Olivier
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 2017-04-10 at 16:28 -0400, Olivier Crête wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > That is really interesting,
>> >
>> > On Mon, 2017-04-10 at 18:42 +0200, Lorenzo Miniero wrote:
>> > > 2017-02-27 22:30 GMT+01:00 Chad Phillips <chad at apartmentlines.com>:
>> > > > Some git bisect work got me to the problem commit:
>> > > > 1ab9d7c104978ea1904aaaad708c1c8c23c77592 is the first bad commit
>> > > > commit 1ab9d7c104978ea1904aaaad708c1c8c23c77592
>> > > > conncheck: Separate valid and succeded states
>> > > He then tried a patch another user referenced on our issue page,
>> > > and it worked instead: https://phabricator.freedesktop.org/D735
>> >
>> > I've been looking at this patch a couple times and the reason I
>> > didn't merge it is that I don't understand what it tries to
>> > accomplish.
>> >
>> > But now I think I figured it out. It seems that libnice sets the
>> > "nominated" flag on all the pairs when it creates them as a
>> > controlling agent, which seems wrong. I think it should set the flag
>> > only when it gets a reply... And this is why propagating the flag
>> > fixes it in some cases, but I think we need to go over the whole
>> > conncheck code and make it set the nominated flag at the right time
>> > (after the reply is received!).
>> >
>> > --
>> > Olivier Crête
>> > olivier.crete at collabora.com
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > nice mailing list
>> > nice at lists.freedesktop.org
>> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nice
>> --
>> Olivier Crête
>> olivier.crete at collabora.com
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/nice/attachments/20170412/3d0266de/attachment.html>