On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 11:18:52 GMT, Daniel Fuchs <[email protected]> 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
