Integrated: 8325579: Inconsistent behavior in com.sun.jndi.ldap.Connection::createSocket

[Christoph Langer]

On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 21:29:28 GMT, Christoph Langer <clanger at openjdk.org> wrote:

> During analysing a customer case I figured out that we have an inconsistency between documentation and actual behavior in class com.sun.jndi.ldap.Connection. The [method documentation of com.sun.jndi.ldap.Connection::createSocket](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/3ebe6c192a5dd5cc46ae2d263713c9ff38cd46bb/src/java.naming/share/classes/com/sun/jndi/ldap/Connection.java#L281) states: "If a timeout is supplied but unconnected sockets are not supported then the timeout is ignored and a connected socket is created."
> 
> This, however does not happen. If a SocketFactory would not support unconnected sockets, it would likely throw a SocketException in [SocketFactory::createSocket()](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/6303c0e7136436a2d3cb6043b88edf788c0067cc/src/java.base/share/classes/javax/net/SocketFactory.java#L123). And since [the code](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/3ebe6c192a5dd5cc46ae2d263713c9ff38cd46bb/src/java.naming/share/classes/com/sun/jndi/ldap/Connection.java#L336) does not check for this behavior, a connection with timeout value through a SocketFactory that does not support unconnected sockets would simply fail with an IOException.
> 
> So we should either make the code adhere to what is documented or adapt the documentation to the actual behavior.
> 
> I hereby try to fix the connect coding. Alternatively, we could also adapt the description - I have no strong opinion. What do the experts suggest?

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 907e30ff
Author:    Christoph Langer <clanger at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/907e30ff00abd6cd4935987810d282f46ec07704
Stats:     245 lines in 3 files changed: 130 ins; 35 del; 80 mod

8325579: Inconsistent behavior in com.sun.jndi.ldap.Connection::createSocket

Reviewed-by: dfuchs, aefimov

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17797