gh-127319: Disable port reuse on HTTP, XMLRPC, and logging TCP servers #135405
+7
−4
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…servers Prior to issue python#120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse. See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170
|
All commit authors signed the Contributor License Agreement. |
vsajip
approved these changes
Jun 15, 2025
|
This needs a backport to 3.14, right? |
|
Thanks @jeremycline for the PR, and @vsajip for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.14. |
miss-islington
pushed a commit
to miss-islington/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 15, 2025
…servers (pythonGH-135405) Prior to issue pythonGH-120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse. See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170 (cherry picked from commit 2bd3895) Co-authored-by: Jeremy Cline <jeremycline@linux.microsoft.com>
|
GH-135538 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.14 branch. |
shuimu5418
pushed a commit
to shuimu5418/cpython001
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 16, 2025
…servers (pythonGH-135405) Prior to issue python#120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse. See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170
vsajip
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 16, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Prior to issue #120485 these servers did not allow port reuse, which makes sense as the behavior of port reuse is surprising if you're not expecting it. It's unclear to me why these services were switched to allow port reuse, but I believe the desired behavior (unless subclasses opt in) is to not allow port reuse.
See also: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323170