While this is a fairly big CL, it's fairly straightforward. It replaces
uses of TimeMs with webrtc::Timestamp, and additionally does some
cleanup of DurationMs to webrtc::TimeDelta that are now easier to do.
Bug: webrtc:15593
Change-Id: Id0e3edcba0533e0e8df3358b1778b6995c344243
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/326560
Reviewed-by: Florent Castelli <orphis@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#41138}
This callback is identical to TimeMillis, but returns a
webrtc::Timestamp instead of a TimeMs.
When all callers have migrated to Now() (and all dcsctp code),
TimeMillis will be removed.
Bug: webrtc:15593
Change-Id: I608387607537f29989736af5bf98c7f184f52ebc
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/326500
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Florent Castelli <orphis@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#41127}
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6525#section-5.2.2:
E2: If the Sender's Last Assigned TSN is greater than the cumulative
acknowledgment point, then the endpoint MUST enter "deferred
reset processing". ... until the cumulative
acknowledgment point reaches the Sender's Last Assigned TSN.
The cumulative acknowledgement point can not only be reached by
receiving DATA chunks, but also by receiving a FORWARD-TSN that
instructs the receiver to skip them. This was only done for DATA and not
for FORWARD-TSN, which is now corrected.
Additionally, an unnecessary implicit sending of SACK after having
received FORWARD-TSN was removed as this is done anyway every time a
packet has been received. This unifies the processing of DATA and
FORWARD-TSN more.
Bug: webrtc:14600
Change-Id: If797d3c46e741074fe05e322d0aebec765a87968
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/321400
Reviewed-by: Harald Alvestrand <hta@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#40811}
This CL adds the API to enable message lifecycle events to be generated.
Those can in turn be used to generate metrics, e.g. latency metrics
tracking the time to send a message, the time until it's acknowledged,
and metrics tracking how often messages are expired.
This will be used to validate that message interleaving really improves
latency for high priority data channels.
The actual implementation of the API will be provided in follow-up CLs.
Bug: webrtc:5696
Change-Id: Ic06f8244d1c79a336975e35479130521dff17519
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/264141
Reviewed-by: Harald Alvestrand <hta@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Florent Castelli <orphis@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#37396}
Following https://abseil.io/tips/122 to make tests easier to understand
and adds a bit of flexibility to create sockets with custom parameters.
This also simplifies handover tests.
Additionally, AdvanceTime will now also run timers, as that was easily
forgotten previously.
Bug: None
Change-Id: Ieb5eece7aca51c98a7634ed1c61646383ad1712d
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/253782
Reviewed-by: Sergey Sukhanov <sergeysu@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#36141}
Context: The timer precision of PostDelayedTask() is about to be lowered
to include up to 17 ms leeway. In order not to break use cases that
require high precision timers, PostDelayedHighPrecisionTask() will
continue to have the same precision that PostDelayedTask() has today.
webrtc::TaskQueueBase has an enum (kLow, kHigh) to decide which
precision to use when calling PostDelayedTaskWithPrecision().
See go/postdelayedtask-precision-in-webrtc for motivation and a table of
delayed task use cases in WebRTC that are "high" or "low" precision.
Most timers in DCSCTP are believed to only be needing low precision (see
table), but the delayed_ack_timer_ of DataTracker[1] is an example of a
use case that is likely to break if the timer precision is lowered (if
ACK is sent too late, retransmissions may occur). So this is considered
a high precision use case.
This CL makes it possible to specify the precision of dcsctp::Timer.
In a follow-up CL we will update delayed_ack_timer_ to kHigh precision.
[1] https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/webrtc/net/dcsctp/rx/data_tracker.cc;l=340
Bug: webrtc:13604
Change-Id: I8eec5ce37044096978b5dd1985fbb00bc0d8fb7e
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/249081
Reviewed-by: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Tomas Gunnarsson <tommi@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Henrik Boström <hbos@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/main@{#35809}
Before this change, there was no way for a client to indicate to the
dcSCTP library if a packet that was supposed to be sent, was actually
sent. It was assumed that it always was.
To handle temporary failures better, such as retrying to send packets
that failed to be sent when the send buffer was full, this information
is propagated to the library.
Note that this change only covers the API and adaptations to clients.
The actual implementation to make use of this information is done as a
follow-up change.
Bug: webrtc:12943
Change-Id: I8f9c62e17f1de1566fa6b0f13a57a3db9f4e7684
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/228563
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Niels Moller <nisse@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Harald Alvestrand <hta@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#34767}
While it's not strictly defined, the expectation is that sending a
message with a lifetime parameter set to zero (0) ms should allow it to
be sent if it can be sent without being buffered. If it can't be
directly sent, it should be discarded.
This is initial support for it. Small messages can now be delivered fine
if they are not to be buffered, but fragmented messages could be partly
sent (if this fills up the congestion window), which means that the
message will then fail to be sent whenever the congestion window frees
up again. It would be better to - at a higher level - realize early that
the message can't be sent in full, and discard it without sending
anything. But that's an optimization that can be done later.
A few off-by-one errors were found when strictly defining that the
message is alive during its entire lifetime. It will expire just _after_
its lifetime.
Sending messages with a lifetime of zero may not supported in all
libraries, so a workaround would be to set a very small timeout instead,
which is tested as well.
Bug: webrtc:12614
Change-Id: I9a00bedb639ad7b3b565b750ef2a49c9020745f1
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/217562
Reviewed-by: Harald Alvestrand <hta@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#33977}
This makes it easier to understand which socket that experience an error
or abort. Aborts are now also logged, which was missed previously.
Bug: webrtc:12614
Change-Id: Ie5e4357b3e5450106cc6cc28c1e9578ad53d073a
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/217764
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Florent Castelli <orphis@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#33947}
In real life, when a Timeout expires, the caller is supposed to call
DcSctpSocket::HandleTimeout directly, as the Timeout that just expired
is stopped (it just expired), but the Timer still believes it's running.
The system is not in a consistent state.
In tests, all timeouts were evaluated at the same time, which, if two
timeouts expired at the same time, would put them both as "not running",
and with their timers believing they were running. So if you would do
any operation on a timer whose timeout had just expired, the timeout
would assert saying that "you can't stop a stopped timeout" or similar.
This isn't relevant in non-test scenarios.
Solved by expiring timeouts one by one.
Bug: webrtc:12614
Change-Id: I79d006f4d3e96854d77cec3eb0080aa23b8569cb
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/217560
Reviewed-by: Florent Castelli <orphis@webrtc.org>
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#33925}
This completes the basic implementation of the dcSCTP library. There
are a few remaining commits to e.g. add compatibility tests and
benchmarks, as well as more support for e.g. RFC8260, but those are not
strictly vital for evaluation of the library.
The Socket contains the connection establishment and teardown sequences
as well as the general chunk dispatcher.
Bug: webrtc:12614
Change-Id: I313b6c8f4accc144e3bb88ddba22269ebb8eb3cd
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/214342
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Mirko Bonadei <mbonadei@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Tommi <tommi@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Harald Alvestrand <hta@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#33890}
In the Socket module, there are a few (two, to be exact right now, but
the goal is to have even more) separate "handlers" that are responsible
for a feature set. These handlers must have an API to interact with
the rest of the socket - and this is the API.
Mocks are also added.
Bug: webrtc:12614
Change-Id: If19b43bf99a784bba3a42467d0ed3abdd8b4c62c
Reviewed-on: https://webrtc-review.googlesource.com/c/src/+/214128
Commit-Queue: Victor Boivie <boivie@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Tommi <tommi@webrtc.org>
Reviewed-by: Mirko Bonadei <mbonadei@webrtc.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#33826}
