I believe that 8170568 [1] better describes the issue being discussed here. So, unless there are any objections, I will close 8257080 as a duplicate of 8170568.
--- There was some renewed interest in this area back in mid 2019, when we touched on it (and several other issues) relating to IPv6 [2] (yes, I know that this is not an IPv6-only specific issue). This is not a new issue, but unfortunately not much progress has been made in this area (beyond some embedded or mobile platforms doing their own thing). I remember discussing this with some folks while at the 80th IETF meeting in Prague, in 2011. Specifically at the time, I prototyped an implementation of Happy Eyeballs [3] at the java.net.Socket level. If memory serves me correct, there were some not-so-straightforward specification issues that would need to worked out, especially relating to exceptions and failures (I don't have the details to hand). Things have moved on a lot since then, for example I see no reason why the Java HTTP Client, that uses non-blocking NIO socket channels, could not do it's own multi-connect thing. This is clearly unrelated to whatever, if anything, is done for java.net.Socket.connect(String,int). -Chris. [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170568 [2] https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2019-April/012371.html [3] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6555 > On 17 Dec 2020, at 14:39, Chris Hegarty <chris.hega...@oracle.com> wrote: > > Looping in a prior relevant issue in JIRA: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170568 - > Improve address selection for network clients > > -Chris. > >> On 17 Dec 2020, at 13:45, Daniel Fuchs <daniel.fu...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Simone, >> >> We are investigating introducing a Service Provider interface >> which would allow an application to replace the default >> built-in implementation that blocks inside the kernel. >> >> There is no plan to introduce any public asynchronous API to perform >> address resolution at this point. With the advent of Loom and >> virtual threads I'm not sure there would be much motivation for >> that anyway. >> >> best regards, >> >> -- daniel >> >> On 16/12/2020 19:59, Simone Bordet wrote: >>> Hi, >>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 5:55 PM Aleks Efimov <aleksej.efi...@oracle.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Benjamin, >>>> >>>> As Alan stated I'm working on adding an SPI [1] which will provide a >>>> possibility to alter how host names and IP addresses are resolved by JDK >>>> platform. >>>> I believe it would be possible to use this mechanism for addressing >>>> issue described in JDK-8257080. >>> Is it hopefully going to be non-blocking? >> >
