Hi Bernd,
The HttpClient uses nio SocketChannels in non blocking mode,
not java.net.Socket.
best regards,
-- daniel
On 15/11/2019 17:10, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
Hello,
Another possible extension point would be a custom socket factory. This
has the additional benefit that the sockets from thi
Hello,
Another possible extension point would be a custom socket factory. This has the
additional benefit that the sockets from this factory also can implement a
happy eyeballs algorithm (which would connect in parallel to multiple IP
address candidates, which is especially helpful for IPv6 pro
Hi Nicolas,
Sorry for the late reply...
On 07/11/2019 17:13, Pavel Rappo wrote:
On 7 Nov 2019, at 14:24, Nicolas Henneaux wrote:
Hi,
*I am trying to build an HTTP client based on java.net.http.HttpClient and
I would like to have some control on the IP addresses resolved under the
hood.*
I w
> On 15 Nov 2019, at 13:13, Patrick Concannon
> wrote:
> ...
>
> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pconcannon/8234083/webrevs/webrev.00/
LGTM.
-Chris.
On 15/11/2019 13:13, Patrick Concannon wrote:
Hi,
Could someone please review my fix for issue JDK-8234083
'DatagramSocket should report SO_BROADCAST as a supported option'?
DatagramSocket has setBroadcast/getBroadcast methods, but omits
SO_BROADCAST as a supported option. This fix adds
Hi,
Could someone please review my fix for issue JDK-8234083 'DatagramSocket
should report SO_BROADCAST as a supported option'?
DatagramSocket has setBroadcast/getBroadcast methods, but omits
SO_BROADCAST as a supported option. This fix adds SO_BROADCAST as a
valid option, and updates Optio
