[
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JGRP-515?page=comments#action_12364654 ]
Bela Ban commented on JGRP-515:
-------------------------------
Forwarding to Bela for his comment as what Neil Horman said _may_ relate to a discussion
he's been having with a user on the JGroups list.
Unless Bela comes back and says Neil's comment has changed his opinion on how this
stuff should work, I think we should pursue the issue.
Ryan Campbell wrote:
Brian, We opened this issue in the RHEL Bugzilla:
http://wiki.jboss.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=PromiscuousTraffic
<
http://wiki.jboss.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=PromiscuousTraffic>https://bu...
As you can see, we even attached a program to reproduce the issue. They have closed the
issue as NOTABUG.
Aleksandar suggested that we write the program as the suggested and
perhaps reopen the bug: The only thing left to check is if binding to the proper socket
will result in the desired behavior. I mean 2 processes can bind to the same
address(group)/port as well not receive mcast messages to other groups.
Should we pursue the issue? I think we have a fair chance of getting it fixed if we can
demonstrate that they violate the RFC.
Thanks,
Ryan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject:
[Fwd: [Bug 231899] multicast incorrect handling]
From:
Aleksandar Kostadinov
Date:
Tue, 22 May 2007 16:25:13 +0300
To:
Ryan Campbell
To:
Ryan Campbell
seems reasonable...
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Multicast-HOWTO-2.html#ss2.4
The only thing left to check is if binding to the proper socket will
result in the desired behavior. I mean 2 processes can bind to the same
address(group)/port as well not receive mcast messages to other groups.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------- Additional Comments From xxxx 2007-05-22 08:55 EST -------
According to the email as I read it, and from what I understand of the RFC, This
is working exactly as designed. the mcreceive program binds to INADDR_ANY
before adding multicast membership. That means the socket in each mcreceive
process should receive all multicast traffic from all groups that any process is
added to, which is exactly what you are seeing. If you want only the first
process to receive multicast frames, then you should write a separate program to
run in step 2 that binds to 225.12.12.14:1444, rather than INADDR_ANY.
the Jboss kbase entry should be fixed to reflect that.
--
Brian Stansberry
Lead, AS Clustering
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
UDP.java requires the multicast address in the multicastsocket
constructor to fix crosstalk on certain operating systems
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: JGRP-515
URL:
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JGRP-515
Project: JGroups
Issue Type: Patch
Environment: Tested on Fedora Core 6, JDK 1.5.0_10
Reporter: ggimler
Assigned To: Bela Ban
Fix For: 2.5
Attachments: mcreceive.c, mcsend.c, UDP.java
I'm submitting a patch for a crosstalk issue described below.
I'm trying to debug a problem I'm seeing when running JGroups on the
same network/machine as another application that is sending/receiving
data via regular multicast (not through JGroups). I'm using version
2.4.1-SP3. My scenario is as follows...
JGroups send on 228.0.0.1:50000
JGroups receive on 228.0.0.1:50000
This works fine. When I start up another application that does
Sends regular multicast on 228.0.0.2:50000
Receives regular multicast on 228.0.0.2:50000
Then the JVM with the JGroups sender/receiver complains with:
May 15, 2007 4:47:59 PM org.jgroups.protocols.TP handleIncomingPacket
WARNING: packet from 192.168.101.133:36594 has different version
(26725) from ours (2.4.1). Packet is discarded
The patch is in UDP.java:
--
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