On 12/07/2012 02:05, Filip Hanik wrote: > I can reproduce the bug in both our unit tests and the original bug report. > further more I can turn non blocking into blocking by opening an closing a > selector that is never used. > > definitely a bug, since a jvm/network flag resolves it. > > while your vm may support ipv6, there is still an additional software layer.
Indeed and all are present. The reason I said it claims to support IPv6 is that I hadn't tested it to confirm what the OS was claiming was indeed true. > I'm sure there will be more bug reports as more people turn to java 7 on > windows/hardware Yep. Mark > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jul 11, 2012, at 16:42, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 11/07/2012 23:30, Filip Hanik (mailing lists) wrote: >>> I wasn't able to reproduce on a Win 7 VM because the VM environment itself >>> doesn't support IPv6 >> >> Given who we work for, the opportunities for humorous comments is >> extensive :) >> >> I'll settle for saying that I've double checked the VM I have and it >> does (claim to) support IPv6. I'll try out the test case provided in the >> original bug report. >> >> Mark >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
