ulrich created AMQ-5516:
---------------------------
Summary: Misbehaving name resolution in
org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransportServer
Key: AMQ-5516
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-5516
Project: ActiveMQ
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Connector
Affects Versions: 5.10.0
Environment: AMQ : 5.10.0
java : Oracle 1.7.0_72-b14
OS : debian 7.4
Reporter: ulrich
Priority: Minor
Hi,
Here is the fragement of our spring config which declares the connectors:
<amq:networkConnectors>
<amq:networkConnector name="brokerName" uri="multicast://default" />
</amq:networkConnectors>
<amq:transportConnector name="openwire" uri="tcp://10.1.1.5:61616"
discoveryUri="multicast://default">
<amq:publishedAddressPolicy>
<amq:publishedAddressPolicy publishedHostStrategy="IPADDRESS" />
</amq:publishedAddressPolicy>
</amq:transportConnector>
We have a configuration where several IP addresses are given to the machine in
/etc/hosts. There is no dns resolving mybox.
The relevant part is this one:
127.0.0.1 mybox localhost
10.1.1.5 mybox
172.16.2.5 mybox
#...others...
In org.apache.activemq.transport.tcp.TcpTransportServer:138, the method bind()
calls resolveHostName(serverSocket, addr) to rewrite the URI (why??).
The URI tcp://10.1.1.5:61616 is rewritten tcp://mybox:61616.
We can't advertise tcp://mybox:61616 since there is no name resolution. This is
why the publishedAddressPolicy is set to IPADDRESS.
The multicast agent rewrites the URI again but the name resolution found for
mybox is 127.0.0.1. The advertised URI is now tcp://127.0.0.1:61616. Each
broker tries to connect to themselves.
Depending on the order of the lines in /etc/hosts to resolve to the correct ip
is about random chance.
Is this call to resolveHostName(serverSocket, addr) really necessary? Why
trying to outsmart the configuration?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
