[reSIProcate] mutex in UdpTransport

[Matthias Moetje]

Hi Jason,

I think you are right and it is unecessary. I can't remember why I put it there. mTxFifo has its own mutex and myMutex is only required in ::stunResult and ::process in order to protect mStunMappedAddress.
So I think the myMutex line in ::stunSendTest can be removed safely.

Best regards,
Freundliche Grüße,

Matthias Moetje
______________________________________________

TERASENS GmbH       Phone:  +49.89.143370-0
Augustenstraße 24   Fax:    +49.89.143370-22
80333 Munich        e-mail: info at terasens.com
GERMANY             Web:    www.terasens.com
______________________________________________



> -----Original Message-----
> From: resiprocate-devel-bounces at list.resiprocate.org
> [mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces at list.resiprocate.org] On Behalf Of
> Jason Fischl
> Sent: Samstag, 7. Juli 2007 01:53
> To: resiprocate-devel
> Subject: [reSIProcate] mutex in UdpTransport
> 
> Forgive me if I am missing the obvious but why is there a mutex in the
> STUN code of UdpTransport?
> i.e. UdpTransport::stunSendTest.
> 
> This doesn't seem necessary to me.
> 
> Jason
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel at list.resiprocate.org
> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel