[
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JGRP-615?page=comments#action_12385552 ]
Bela Ban commented on JGRP-615:
-------------------------------
I chose not to implement the kludge described below. This is overhead, especially on
operating systems where it is not used.
According to
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-larsen-tsvwg-port-randomization-02 (section
2.2), the algorithm for port allocation is:
next_ephemeral_port = 1024; /*initialization, could be random */
/* Ephemeral port selection */
count = max_ephemeral - min_ephemeral + 1;
do {
port = next_ephemeral;
if (next_ephemeral == max_ephemeral) {
next_ephemeral = min_ephemeral;
} else {
next_ephemeral++;
}
if (four-tuple is unique)
return port;
} while (count > 0);
return ERROR;
This should actually always allocate the next available port ! Need to investigate why
this is not the case...
UDP: JGroups always allocates the same ports
--------------------------------------------
Key: JGRP-615
URL:
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JGRP-615
Project: JGroups
Issue Type: Task
Reporter: Bela Ban
Assigned To: Bela Ban
Priority: Minor
Fix For: 2.6, 2.5.2
In 2.5 and 2.6, JGroups always allocates the same ports with UDP and no bind_port set.
This is different from 2.4, where different (increasing) ports were used.
Investigate why this is the case, and what changed between 2.4 and 2.5.
This doesn't happen on Windows and macOS, just on Linux.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira