RFR[8240533]: 'Inconsistent Exceptions are thrown by DatagramSocket and DatagramChannel when sending a DatagramPacket to port 0.'

[Daniel Fuchs]

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.
>>