More context behind dual native port support might be found here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9590 where it was implemented.
On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 12:07 PM Abe Ratnofsky <a...@aber.io> wrote: > What is the audience for dual-native-port operation? My understanding is > that most users can use a single port for optional SSL, ever since > CASSANDRA-10559 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10559>. > Using a single port for both encrypted and unencrypted traffic also makes > clients more likely to behave correctly, since status and topology events > (which identify hosts by their native address and port) will correctly > identify host+port pairs that exist in user load balancing policies and > connection pools. Dual-port operation appears to behave incorrectly against > apache/cassandra-java-driver 4.x, as discussed in the #cassandra-drivers > Slack channel > <https://the-asf.slack.com/archives/C05LPRVNZV1/p1706806264331249>. If > this does not behave correctly in the official driver, it's likely there > are bugs in other drivers' handling of dual-native-port clusters as well. > > Would there be any appetite for deprecating dual-native-port operation? > > > Also, if there is currently a user who e.g. reads from peers_v2 table > and retrieves the value from a column by some index, then this would be > "shifted" and it might break her reading. > > Given that peers_v2 is intended to be used by the internals of client > implementations, we should be extra cautious about making changes. We > shouldn't change the column index of any existing columns - if we're going > to add a new column, it should be in the end position. > > Abe >
