[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4577?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15892280#comment-15892280
]
Evgenii Zhuravlev commented on IGNITE-4577:
-------------------------------------------
Implemented a new idea with using isReachable for sorting addresses. Review
link: http://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-110
> Ensure that certain interface addresses can be excluded form node attributes
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: IGNITE-4577
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4577
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: general
> Affects Versions: 1.8
> Reporter: Vladimir Ozerov
> Assignee: Evgenii Zhuravlev
> Fix For: 2.0
>
>
> *Problem*
> Consider a case when node has some network interface which is not accessible
> from the outside (e.g. in Docker container). Ignite adds this address to
> attributes, which are shared with other nodes. Now if remote want to
> communicate with local node chances that he will try to establish connection
> with invalid address.
> In the worst case connection will be impossible. We use {{AddressResolver}}
> to handle this situation.
> However, it appears that {{AddressResolver}} cannot prevent certain address
> to appear in address list. As a result users may experience communication
> delays as we establish peer-to-peer connection in one thread, iterating over
> all available addresses.
> *Proposed solution*
> We need to examine what happens when address resolver is set. May be it is
> necessary to rethink how we handle returned object. E.g. {{null}} or empty
> collection might mean that this address should not be included into the list
> of address. However, it may break existing applications, so chances that
> other solution is needed.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
