Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement TestInterceptorNackReply #2986

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

jech
Copy link
Member

@jech jech commented Jan 2, 2025

Another end-to-end test, this time for the NACK responder.
It verifies that we actually receive a reply to a NACK,
both when we negotiate an RTX track and when we don't.

This currently fails, for unknown reasons.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 2, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 63.50%. Comparing base (1ee0299) to head (fb1c61f).

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (1ee0299) and HEAD (fb1c61f). Click for more details.

HEAD has 2 uploads less than BASE
Flag BASE (1ee0299) HEAD (fb1c61f)
go 2 0
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2986       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   77.93%   63.50%   -14.43%     
===========================================
  Files          89       67       -22     
  Lines       10546     3957     -6589     
===========================================
- Hits         8219     2513     -5706     
+ Misses       1838     1316      -522     
+ Partials      489      128      -361     
Flag Coverage Δ
go ?
wasm 63.50% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@jech jech force-pushed the nack-test-2 branch 3 times, most recently from fc9d59e to 7bfc4bf Compare January 2, 2025 18:20
jech added 2 commits January 3, 2025 02:02
One variable was misnamed, and we never checked for the end
of the RTCP loop.
This is another end-to-end test for the NACK interceptor,
it verifies that we actually get a reply to a NACK, both with
and without a negotiated RTX track.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant