On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 11:18:52 GMT, Daniel Fuchs <dfu...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Jaikiran Pai has updated the pull request incrementally with four additional >> commits since the last revision: >> >> - SNI server names can now be derived from the Origin instance >> - strip the square brackets from URI's host when constructing an Origin >> - support only lower case http and https literals for scheme in Origin >> - add new line > > src/java.net.http/share/classes/jdk/internal/net/http/AsyncSSLConnection.java > line 50: > >> 48: String[] alpn, >> 49: String label) { >> 50: super(originServer, addr, client, Utils.getServerName(addr), >> addr.getPort(), alpn, label); > > Do we still need Utils.getServerName(addr), addr.getPort(), now that we have > originServer? Or in other words - should we base these calls on the `addr` > parameter or on the `originServer` parameters? I had a look at it and you are right - with the introduction of this `Origin` construct, it should now be possible (and in fact prefered) to use it for constructing the SNI names. I updated this code to use the `Origin` instance. While doing that, the change caused a test failure which exposed one detail that I hadn't considered. `java.net.URI.getHost()` is specified to return a IPv6 address enclosed in square brackets. The `Origin` class hadn't considered that previously. It's now been updated to strip the square brackets when constructing the host value. This will allow the `Origin.host()` to be used in places where it was/is being used as a host that might be returned from a `InetAddress`. Local testing with this change now passes all the tests. I'll now trigger tier testing in our CI. > src/java.net.http/share/classes/jdk/internal/net/http/AsyncSSLTunnelConnection.java > line 54: > >> 52: String label) >> 53: { >> 54: super(originServer, addr, client, Utils.getServerName(addr), >> addr.getPort(), alpn, label); > > Same question Updated to use the `Origin` instance. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26041#discussion_r2175349780 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26041#discussion_r2175351647