Wrap RtcpReader in fresh objects per call to bind_rtcp_reader in default interceptors

[robashton]

As promised yesterday, a fix for #2

[robashton]

NB: I'm currently testing this (seemingly) innocous change in our downstream systems, and would probably hold off on doing a merge until I know all of that works.

[robashton]

Well this seems to not break anything, but my read_rtcp call still falls on the floor so I'll open an issue for that.

[robashton]

webrtc-rs/webrtc#150

[rainliu]

what about other interceptors? like NACK, TWCC?

I think they have the same issue, right?

I will merge this PR first, you can continue to submit other PRs to fix others.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #3 (9d88493) into main (fd129ea) will decrease coverage by 0.11%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main       #3      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   59.83%   59.71%   -0.12%     
==========================================
  Files          32       32              
  Lines        2014     2013       -1     
  Branches      575      575              
==========================================
- Hits         1205     1202       -3     
- Misses        250      251       +1     
- Partials      559      560       +1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/nack/responder/mod.rs	0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/report/mod.rs	90.47% <ø> (-0.23%)	⬇️
src/report/receiver/mod.rs	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/nack/generator/generator_stream.rs	81.52% <0.00%> (-2.18%)	⬇️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update fd129ea...9d88493. Read the comment docs.

[robashton]

what about other interceptors? like NACK, TWCC?

I think they have the same issue, right?

I will merge this PR first, you can continue to submit other PRs to fix others.

I think they're all in this PR, it's only in places where there was a parent_rtcp_reader - I thought there were more too, but grep disagreed!

[rainliu]

yeah, you are right. :)

Thanks for the fix.