RFR[8240533]: 'Inconsistent Exceptions are thrown by DatagramSocket and DatagramChannel when sending a DatagramPacket to port 0.'
Lance Andersen
lance.andersen at oracle.com
Sat Apr 4 17:00:10 UTC 2020
Hi Patrick,
This looks good to me..
Best
Lance
> On Apr 4, 2020, at 11:26 AM, Patrick Concannon <patrick.concannon at oracle.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Chris and Daniel,
>
>
> Well spotted, Chris. Thanks for that!
>
> Thanks too Daniel, that's a good idea. I've made those changes and included them in a new webrev, which you can find below.
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pconcannon/8240533/webrevs/webrev.02/
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Patrick
>
> On 03/04/2020 17:16, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Hi Patrick,
>>
>> 120 { perms.add(new SocketPermission("127.0.0.1:0",
>> 121 "connect,accept")); }
>> 122 { perms.add(new SocketPermission("0.0.0.0:0",
>> 123 "connect,accept")); }
>>
>> there in other tests - I think a single permission:
>>
>> { perms.add(new SocketPermission("*:0")); }
>>
>> would be more robust as it would take care of both IPv6 and IPv4 in one
>> go. We should strive to avoid to hard-code 127.0.0.1 and 0.0.0.0
>> in tests.
>>
>> best regards,
>>
>> -- daniel
>>
>> On 03/04/2020 14:47, Patrick Concannon wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the feedback.
>
>
>>>
>>> Lance - I swapped out expectThrows for assertThrows, as requested.
>>>
>>> Chris - I put in an extra check in the tests to ensure that the new code doesn’t interfere with the Security Manager checks already present in the source.
>>>
>>> The new webrev can be found here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pconcannon/8240533/webrevs/webrev.01/
>
>>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pconcannon/8240533/webrevs/webrev.01/>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>> On 31/03/2020 15:33, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>>>> Patrick,
>>>>
>>>>> On 31 Mar 2020, at 15:08, Daniel Fuchs<daniel.fuchs at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ..
>>>>>> bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8240533
>>>>>> webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pconcannon/8240533/webrevs/webrev.00/
>>>> Look good Patrick.
>>>>
>>>> The check is deliberately performed after the security manager checks, right? If so, it is worth asserting this in a test.
>>>>
>>>> -Chris.
>>>>
>>
<http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif>
<http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif> <http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif>
<http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif>Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037
Oracle Java Engineering
1 Network Drive
Burlington, MA 01803
Lance.Andersen at oracle.com <mailto:Lance.Andersen at oracle.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/attachments/20200404/db1b171b/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: oracle_sig_logo.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 658 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/attachments/20200404/db1b171b/oracle_sig_logo.gif>
More information about the net-dev
mailing list