On 12/27/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mikhail Markov wrote: > Why not use ServerSocket(0) to just *obtain* some positive non-busy port > number (and close it after port number obtaining) and after that test > ServerSocket constructor with this obtained port number? In this case we'll > not require any reserved ports at all. There is obviously a race condition there, so you may have to make a number of attempts to get the port you think is now free before others take it.
The only race condition i see here is that another process could take this port between closing of 1-st ServerSocket and opening a new one. Is this what you mean? (But the same thing may happen if one of applications takes pre-defined fixed port at any point during tests run when it's free.) Regards, Mikhail Regards,
Tim
