Imp.setproxy() ambiguity

The documentation for imp.setproxy() states:

"Settings are applied on the next connection attempt, ie. if the device is already connected when this method is called, the proxy settings will not be used until the device has first disconnected (by entering deep sleep, by being power-cycled, or manually in code)."

For clarity, should this say “Settings are applied on all subsequent connection attempts until imp.clearconfiguration(CONFIG_PROXY) is called…”? Just using the word next indicates to me that it is a one-shot.

As the fellow what wrote it, I can safely say it would have been ‘applied on the next connection attempt and only on that connection attempt’, had it been intended to convey one-shot usage.

Hi Tony, the documentation for should probably say that the proxy slot in the ipv4 table is absent if imp.setproxy() has not been used. This would be consistent with the description for ipv4.dhcpserver. I don’t want to sound like a pendant about this (but probably do). :-7
I’m folding in proxy and static ip support into a multi-interface, multi-ssid model for connection. I think the Electric Imp team should consider that model further as the API expands. The changes in the interface control shouldn’t shut the possibility out.
I will have to continually test for (“dhcpserver” in and (“proxy” in to know when imp.setstaticnetworkconfigration() or imp.setproxy() have been deployed for the previous connection attempt, and, if they are not required (and potentially disruptive) for the next connection attempt, remove them with imp.clearconfiguration().

You’re right there: the docs should state where a listed key will be absent from a table if there is no data. I’ll check these out with the imp dev team.