----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34128/#review87611 -----------------------------------------------------------
3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp <https://reviews.apache.org/r/34128/#comment140007> If two libprocess based unix processes (e.g., scheudler and master) are within the *same* bridged container, would they able to communicate with this change? Can you test this to confirm? If not, a better option might be to instead have LIBPROCESS_BIND_IP and LIBPROCESS_BIND_PORT that just changes the address we bind to. LIBPROCESS_IP and LIBPROCESS_PORT semantics could be left untouched. - Vinod Kone On May 18, 2015, 10:08 p.m., Anindya Sinha wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/34128/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 18, 2015, 10:08 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos. > > > Bugs: MESOS-809 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-809 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Expose environment variables LIBPROCESS_PUBLIC_IP and LIBPROCESS_PUBLIC_PORT > as the IP and > port which libprocess would advertise (if set). If not set, it defaults to > the IP and port on which it binded to. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp > e3de3cd6b536aaaf59784360aed546512dd04dc9 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/34128/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Testing: > make test > > > Thanks, > > Anindya Sinha > >
