[EXTERNAL] Re: Support for Keepalive Extended Socket Options On Windows

[Daniel Fuchs]

Hi Terry,

I'm not sure what would be a good default value, but it could
possibly be controlled by a system property allowing to override
whatever we pick.

best regards,

-- daniel


On 05/06/2023 20:52, Terry Chow (Simba Technologies Inc) wrote:
> Hi Alan and Daniel,
> 
> Agreed, having Windows support the keepalive options as it's done on 
> other platforms would be the best. But, lobbying them for that change 
> would be extremely difficult as it would be very significant change that 
> impacts the whole platform.
> 
> What defaults values do you guys have in mind? I'm still hesitating on 
> persisting default values because the default values can vary between 
> machines.
> 
> Thanks,
> Terry
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at oracle.com>
> *Sent:* June 4, 2023 7:32 AM
> *To:* Daniel Fuchs <daniel.fuchs at oracle.com>; Terry Chow (Simba 
> Technologies Inc) <v-terrychow at microsoft.com>; net-dev at openjdk.org 
> <net-dev at openjdk.org>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: Support for Keepalive Extended Socket Options 
> On Windows
> [You don't often get email from alan.bateman at oracle.com. Learn why this 
> is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification 
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!L3ZqYRNNOoxRi17MfA-Xuhn96mbJFGf8N9hRRT_fKwRroiRBdo_QNCcfm6-S-qa3FXTquasM6y3tpVE_ac_Dl3MS7A$> ]
> 
> On 04/06/2023 10:49, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Could we maybe cache the values in the SocketImpl/NIOSocketImpl
>> implementation?
>>
>> IIRC we do something like that for SO_TIMEOUT already, since this
>> is handled at NIO level.
>>
>> If we know the default value then setting one (when the other is
>> not set) could set it with the supplied value for the one, and
>> the default (or cached value) for the other?
>>
>> Get would then return the cached value (or possibly default
>> value if not set?)
>>
>> We could also potentially set some sensible defaults when creating
>> the socket.
>>
> Yes, this is what I was suggesting in PR14232 too but it will likely be
> a disruptive change. It can be prototyped at least, then we can see how
> we could turn it into something that is maintainable. The best outcome
> would of course be for Windows to expose the socket options in the same
> way as Linux, macOS and others.
> 
> -Alan