net: Execute Discover() when bind=0.0.0.0 or :: is set #33935

1. 
   psam21 commented at 12:32 pm on November 24, 2025: none

   Fixes #31293

   When using -bind=0.0.0.0:port or -bind=[::]:port (or their -whitebind equivalents), the Discover() function was not being executed because bind_on_any was set to false when explicit bind addresses were provided.

   This meant that nodes using explicit “any” bind addresses would not discover and advertise their own local addresses to peers, even though they were effectively listening on all interfaces.

   This commit checks if any of the explicitly provided -bind or -whitebind addresses are “any” addresses (0.0.0.0 or ::) and ensures Discover() runs in those cases, matching the behavior when no explicit bind is given.

2. net: Execute Discover() when bind=0.0.0.0 or :: is set

   When using -bind=0.0.0.0:port or -bind=[::]:port (or their -whitebind
   equivalents), the Discover() function was not being executed because
   bind_on_any was set to false when explicit bind addresses were provided.
   
   This meant that nodes using explicit "any" bind addresses would not
   discover and advertise their own local addresses to peers, even though
   they were effectively listening on all interfaces.
   
   This commit checks if any of the explicitly provided -bind or -whitebind
   addresses are "any" addresses (0.0.0.0 or ::) and ensures Discover()
   runs in those cases, matching the behavior when no explicit bind is given.
   
   Fixes #31293

   7b42ca7529
3. DrahtBot added the label P2P on Nov 24, 2025
4. 
   DrahtBot commented at 12:32 pm on November 24, 2025: contributor

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   Code Coverage & Benchmarks

   For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/33935.

   Reviews

   See the guideline for information on the review process. A summary of reviews will appear here.

5. 
   maflcko commented at 12:59 pm on November 24, 2025: member

   Thx, but instead of opening a third (3rd) pull request to fix this, it would be better to review the first two and possibly explain why they are insufficient and why a third pull request is needed.
6. maflcko closed this on Nov 24, 2025

   ---

Contributors
psam21 DrahtBot maflcko

Labels
P2P