[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-serviceability-dev
Subject:    Re: RFR(M): JDK-8061228 Allow JDWP socket connector to accept connections from certain ip addresses 
From:       "serguei.spitsyn () oracle ! com" <serguei ! spitsyn () oracle ! com>
Date:       2017-05-19 18:37:21
Message-ID: 8fa7c4f7-6917-4bf3-702f-0ae444b4fe25 () oracle ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 5/19/17 06:22, Robbin Ehn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 05/19/2017 08:27 AM, serguei.spitsyn@oracle.com wrote:
>> On 5/18/17 04:05, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>>> Hi of those:
>>>
>>>> One more alternate solution to suggest is to add new function:
>>>> jdwpTransportError 
>>>> SetTransportConfiguration(jdwpTransportConfiguration config);
>>>>
>>>> Where:
>>>>    typedef struct {
>>>>        const char* allowed_peers;
>>>>    } jdwpTransportConfiguration;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This approach allows to extend the jdwpTransportConfiguration in 
>>>> the future if necessary.
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> It would nice if a compiled client against JDK 8 headers works 
>>> without recompiling with a JDK 9 runtime.
>>> To make really future proof; using a client compiled against JDK 9 
>>> with JDK 1X you will need some way to know witch version of the 
>>> struct was used.
>>>
>>> E.g. SetTransportConfiguration(&config, 
>>> JDWP_TRANSPORT_CONFIGURATION_CURRENT_VERSION);
>>
>> No need to have a separate transport configuration versioning.
>> It is enough to have just a transport API versioning.
>
> My thought when writing that was to not add the transport API versioning.
> But as you say if that is there, we already know the struct version.

Right.

Thanks,
Serguei

>
> /Robbin
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Serguei
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks, Robbin!
>>

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]