[jboss-jira] [JBoss JIRA] (AS7-1615) Make socket binding interface and port values available for use in property subsitution

Make socket binding interface and port values available for use in property subsitution --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key: AS7-1615 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AS7-1615 Project: Application Server 7 Issue Type: Feature Request Components: Domain Management Reporter: Brian Stansberry Fix For: 7.1.0.CR1 See linked dev list thread for an example use case (remote socket binding used in an driver-specific JDBC URL). Some gotchas noted on the thread that need to be resolved: A tricky thing to deal with is interfaces and socket bindings are actually on-demand services. They aren't resolved until they are demanded. Nothing in this connection-url scenario would demand the socket binding, so it won't be resolved, and until it's resolved no system property could be set. That could be handled by adding an "auto-start" attribute on the socket-binding config. Not particularly intuitive though. Another thing to deal with is interface resolution. With the exception of the "<loopback address="127.0.0.4"/> criteria Scott added, resolving an interface means finding a NIC on the machine that matches the criteria. If that can't be done, it's an error condition. To avoid that there would need to be some new criteria added (e.g. <remote-inet-address value="10.0.0.53"/>) or an attribute added to the existing inet-address criteria (e.g. <inet-address value="10.0.0.53" local="false"/>. (There is a separate JIRA for this issue: AS7-1614) A minor issue relates to changing the configuration of a socket binding. Basically, we try and track whether you've used a particular SocketBinding service to open a socket; if not we let you change the binding config without requiring a server restart or reload. This connection-url stuff won't use the SocketBinding service to create a socket, so the binding will be editable at runtime with no reload/restart required. But there's no dependency relationship between the binding and the datasource, so that change is not going to be reflected in the datasource. This is just an example of the general problem with using system properties as an injection mechanism. I don't think this last point is a blocker, it just requires documentation.