RFR: 8179559 Solaris MulticastSocket issues

[Michael McMahon]

Hi Mark,

It's certainly arguable that the OS should return the same address that 
was configured.
But, I think we can work around that limitation regardless.

Since I sent the first webrev, I found a bug in 
NetworkInterface.getByInetAddress()
and after fixing that, the MulticastSocket code does not need to change.
I'll send an updated webrev later.

Thanks
Michael.

On 05/05/2017, 14:52, Mark Sheppard wrote:
> If we look at the failure scenario then it seen that
> with multiple network interfaces having IPv6 and IPv4 configurations,
> where the IPv6 part is not fully configured and is not UP, but is
> RUNNING
>
> wrt the change in MulticastSocket, is there not a deeper issue here?
> that is,  in the MulticastSocket.getInterface()  method  the invocation
>
> InetAddress ia = (InetAddress) 
> getImpl().getOption(SocketOptions.IP_MULTICAST_IF)
>
> doesn't return the same address as that which was set by the
> MulticastSocket.setInterface()
>
> in the problematic configurations the IPv6 interface is not UP, but it 
> is RUNNING, MULTICAST, and
> the address is unspecified. It would be expected that the OS would 
> return the address configured in the
> previous setsockopt?
> At least it would be assumed that the OS syscall would be using the 
> state of the interface
> as criteria to avoid returning the unspecified IPv6 address in
> preference to the UP and RUNNING and selected IPv4 address?
> It seems the OS preference is for IPv6 regardless of the state on the 
> interface.
> Is there an issue to be raised with Solaris OS ?
>
>
> Additionally, wrt  the try block incorporating the  address search by
> iterating  over the network interfaces, the catch clause will return ia
> That is, the address retrieved with via the previous getOption 
> invocation.
> Should this not return null or even re-throw the Exception?
> returning an Address in this case seems questionable.
>
> with respect to the change in MulticastSocket/Test.java
> should the address checks be considered as OS agnostic?
>
> a number of multicast socket tests exclude the network interface 
> unspecified address
> and the loopback address for consideration.
>
> regards
> Mark
>
>
> On 05/05/2017 11:02, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>>> On 5 May 2017, at 10:23, Michael McMahon 
>>> <michael.x.mcmahon at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Could I get the following changed reviewed please?
>>>
>>> It's a fix for the two Solaris Multicast socket tests that fail always.
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~michaelm/8179559/webrev.1/
>> This looks ok to me Michael. Good to have this loooooooooong standing
>> issue finally addressed. Thank you.
>>
>> -Chris.
>