> Station.Disconnect does not affect WSC state FYI. It can't
> Station doesn't even know about the ongoing WSC process until after
> station_connect_network is invoked. So in that respect we'd be
> completely consistent.
What I meant is that Disconnect() can cancel your station connection
attempt at any point, while with Peer.Disconnect() you're going to
have to be more careful for no reason.
You will have to explain that then, because I don't get it? How is
Peer.Disconnect any different? Your 'Peer' state doesn't change to
connecting until after WSC runs. And if we become a GO, then things
become even more funny since we can only send invites, not actually
initiate a connection. So all these methods become somewhat irrelevant.
In fact, I wonder if we should be removing the WSC interface when we
become the GO and adding another one for performing invitations.
I was just noting they're not happening on different interfaces.
Of course. That's because P2P_CLIENT is just a station iftype under the
hood in the kernel with some extra stuff bolted on. But we knew that ;)
Maybe what we should do is just implement the bare minimum client side
API, learn from it and assume that whatever API we come up with now will
likely not survive when we start implementing GO side.