RFR 8153674: Expected SocketException not thrown when calling bind() with setReuseAddress(false)
mark.sheppard at oracle.com
Wed Sep 14 12:23:31 UTC 2016
so are you accepting that it is correct to add the overridden
methods in MulticastSocket and that these need
appropriate javadoc ?
or are you advocating pushing the handing of the SO_REUSEPORT into the
base DatagramSocket class ?
It is not clear how your code changes fit in the proposed fix i.e. the
explicit setting of the option to false?
With the current proposed changes then I think it would be sufficient to
invoke setReuseAddress(true) in MulticastSocket constructors
// Enable SO_REUSEADDR before binding
// Enable SO_REUSEPORT if supported before binding
as the overridden setReuseAddress takes care of SO_REUSEPORT
On 14/09/2016 11:43, Chris Hegarty wrote:
> On 11/09/16 08:01, Vyom Tewari wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> Please review the below code change.
>> Bug : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153674
>> Webrev :
>> This change override the "get/setReuseAddress" for MulticaseSocket and
>> will abstract with both reuse attributes(SO_REUSEADDR & SO_REUSEPORT).
> This issue arises since the changes for 6432031 "Add support for
> SO_REUSEPORT" , which sets SO_REUSEPORT on MulticastSocket, if
> the available. So setting setReuseAddress(false) alone is no longer
> sufficient to disable address/port reuse, one must also set
> SO_REUSEPORT to false.
> I would be really nervous about changing set/getReuseAddress, without
> at least updating the javadoc to indicate that it is now, for MS,
> operating on two socket options. Although, I do have sympathy
> here since SO_REUSEPORT and SO_REUSEADDR are almost identical when
> dealing with multicasting.
> An alternative, maybe; Since the MS constructors document that
> SO_REUSEPORT will be set, where available, maybe a javadoc note
> on the set/getReuseAddress methods would be sufficient, that
> indicates that StandardSocketOptions#SO_REUSEPORT may also need
> to be set to have the desired effect?
> If so, then code would have to:
> if (supportedOptions().contains(StandardSocketOptions.SO_REUSEPORT))
> this.setOption(StandardSocketOptions.SO_REUSEPORT, false);
> , but at least it is explicit.
> Q: not all MS constructors document that SO_REUSEPORT is set, but
> they should, right? This seems to have slipped past during 6432031 .
>  https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6432031
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the net-dev