[8u] RFR 8044500: [1/2] Add kinit options and krb5.conf flags that allow users to obtain renewable tickets and specify ticket lifetimes

[Weijun Wang]

Some explanations of the name provider in KDC.java:

Most tests in krb5/auto needs to treat any host name as 127.0.0.1. Until JDK 8, I used an inner class KDC$KDCNameService to do this. It was specified in META-INF/services and turned on with the -Dsun.net.spi.nameservice.provider.1=ns,mock system property in each test.

In JDK 9, JDK-8134577 introduced a /etc/hosts-style file TestHosts in the same directory. It needs to be copied to the working directory with "@run main jdk.test.lib.FileInstaller TestHosts TestHosts" and then enabled with -Djdk.net.hosts.file=TestHosts.

Hope this helps.

--Max

> On Jan 8, 2020, at 12:48 AM, Volker Simonis <volker.simonis at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> The difference in the "test/sun/security/krb5/auto/KDC.java" are still
> confusing but that's obviously caused by the dowport of 8187218 which
> already brought in a much newer version of that test. I'm only
> wondering if the Tier1&Tier2 tests you've run include the KDC.java
> test (or if you've run it manually otherwise). If it passes I think
> the current version is fine.
> 
> A final point are the additional test arguments
> "-Dsun.net.spi.nameservice.provider.1=ns,mock" for
> "test/sun/security/krb5/auto/Renewal.java". Are they required in order
> to make the test work in jdk8? And the same question like for the
> previous test: is it part of Tier1&Tier2 or did you run it manually
> and does it pass?
> 
> So if the included tests pass, I'm fine with this downport and you can
> consider it reviewed (if nothing exceptional happens, I should even be
> an "official" JDK 8 Updates Reviewer by the end of today :)
> 
> Best regards,
> Volker
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 12:00 AM Hohensee, Paul <hohensee at amazon.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Ping for the new year. :)
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>> On 12/2/19, 2:07 PM, "jdk8u-dev on behalf of Hohensee, Paul" <jdk8u-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of hohensee at amazon.com> wrote:
>> 
>>    Ping for another review pls.
>> 
>>    Thanks,
>>    Paul
>> 
>>    On 11/18/19, 3:40 PM, "jdk8u-dev on behalf of Hohensee, Paul" <jdk8u-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of hohensee at amazon.com> wrote:
>> 
>>        Lgtm, but would another reviewer also take a look please?
>> 
>>        Thanks,
>> 
>>        Paul
>> 
>>        On 11/8/19, 11:39 AM, "jdk8u-dev on behalf of Verghese, Clive" <jdk8u-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of verghese at amazon.com> wrote:
>> 
>>            Hi,
>> 
>>            Requesting review for backport of JDK-8044500,
>> 
>>            JBS Issue : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044500
>>            Original Change : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/fb5752b152d9
>>            Webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alvdavi/webrevs/8044500/webrev.8u.00/
>> 
>>            This is backport is a dependency for backporting JDK-8186576.
>> 
>>            Parts of this backport have already been backported into JDK-8044500.
>>            The patch did not apply cleanly and the major difference were
>> 
>>              *   Variable name changes in KDC.java
>>              *   Imports in Config.java
>> 
>>            Both Tier1 and Tier2 tests in Linux x64.
>> 
>>            Regards,
>>            Clive Verghese
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>