I don't see where your example of getDefault() is any different than the
current code path. A user has to define a SSLContext when using
getDefault() which as far as I can tell goes through the code path of
SSLContext.get[Server]SocketFactory()
Tony
On 08/08/2018 08:52 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
+1 to everything Sean said, and just to add ...
This change will prevent an SSLContext from giving out socket
factories when it has been configured with DTLS. What about
SSL[Server]SocketFactory::getDefault when the default SSL
context is DTLS? I don’t see that getDefault can throw an UOE,
should it? Or should / could this be resolved at the socket
factory level, when trying to create new sockets rather than at
the factory retrieval time?
-Chris.
On 8 Aug 2018, at 15:46, Sean Mullan <sean.mul...@oracle.com> wrote:
On 8/7/18 8:05 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Hi Tony,
The Specification section looks more like the implementation details. We may
change the implementation details again in the future. It may be more suitable
to move it to the Solution section, or just remove it.
I agree, I would omit the diffs and put N/A for the Specification section.
In the Specification section, I may just say something like, "No APIs changes. The
SunJSSE provider is updated to throw UnsupportedOperationException if
SSLContext.SSLServerSocketFactory() or SSLContext.SSLSocketFactory() get called for DTLS
algorithms SSLContext".
I think the CSR should also say that the SunJSSE implementation of the
engineGetSocketFactory and engineGetServerSocketFactory methods of
SSLContextSpi have been changed to throw UnsupportedOperationException. That is
the specific API behavior change.
A few other comments on the CSR:
"SSLContext.getSSLSocketFactory() and SSLContext.getSSLServerSocketFactory()"
Typo, there is no "SSL" in the method names.
The Compatibility Risk field has several typos ("there" -> "their", "how ->
now", ...) and is a bit hard to understand. Wasn't TLS being used before instead of DTLS in certain scenarios?
Because the API silently passed in certain cases, and now we will be throwing an Exception, maybe it might be
better to say the risk is low.
In the Summary section, it says "..., but it is not documented." I suggest
opening a docs bug to improve the DTLS documentation so that it is more clear this
scenario is not supported.
I think the Interface Kind should be Java API since we are changing the
behavior of an implementation of a standard API. I asked Joe Darcy this
question yesterday, and he agreed.
--Sean
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/7/2018 4:14 PM, Anthony Scarpino wrote:
Hi Xuelei,
I have updated the csr and I believe I have addressed your comments.
thanks
Tony
On 08/07/2018 01:43 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Hi Tony,
Would you mind make it clear that this impact the JDK JSSE provider only?
Third party's provider may be able to support DTLS with SSLSocket.
I think there may be no specification change. The SSLContext.getServerSocketFactory()
and SSLContext.getSocketFactory() defines the spec if the algorithm is not supported by
the underlying provider, "UnsupportedOperationException - if the underlying provider
does not implement the operation.". I may prefer to make it clear that this is just
a behavior change of the JDK JSSE provider (SunJSSE). The SunJSSE provider now throws
UnsupportedOperationException for creating SSL(Server)SocketFactory with DTLS SSLContext,
because it does not actually support DTLS SSLSocket.
In Solution section, "Throwing a UnsupportedOperationException when getting a socket
from the SSLServerSocketFactory or SSLSocketFactory for DTLS." I guess you meant,
throwing a UOE when calling SSLContext.getServerSocketFactory() and
SSLContext.getSocketFactory()?
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/7/2018 12:17 PM, Anthony Scarpino wrote:
I need a review of a CSR for SSLSocket should throw an exception when
configuring DTLS. We are targeting this for 12 right now.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8209031
thanks
Tony
