[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-6784?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14958833#comment-14958833
 ] 

Keith Wall commented on QPID-6784:
----------------------------------

I think {{NBC._unexpectedByteBufferSizeUsed}} needs to be volatile to avoid a 
publication issue.  NonBlockingConnections are run by any thread in the IO 
pools.  Also the name does not convey the purpose - should it not be 
_unexpectedByteBufferSizeReported?

> [Java Broker, Java Client] Client sends too large frames and broker does 
> wrong frame size validation on 0-9
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: QPID-6784
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-6784
>             Project: Qpid
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Java Broker, Java Client
>    Affects Versions: 0.17, 0.32
>            Reporter: Lorenz Quack
>            Assignee: Keith Wall
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: qpid-java-6.0
>
>
> The Client does not include the frame attributes (except for 1 byte) in its 
> calculation of the AMQP Frame size thus creating frames which are 7 bytes too 
> large. This happens in 
> {{org.apache.qpid.client.BasicMessageProducer_0_8#calculateContentBodyFrameCount}}
>  and maybe other places.
> The broker on the other end does an incorrect validation (in 
> {{AMQDecoder#decodable}} at least) where it does not take any of the 
> attributes into account thus accepting too large frames.
> Besides not being compliant with the spec this causes problems in 
> {{NonBlockingConnectionPlainDelegate#processData}} where the frame does not 
> fit into a single networkBuffer.
> I did not investigate other protocol versions.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to