Add setEnabledProtocols option to OTLP exporter builders

[jack-berg]

Fixes #7573

[otelbot]

⚠️ API changes detected — additional maintainer review required

@jack-berg @jkwatson

This PR modifies the public API surface area of the following module(s):

• opentelemetry-exporter-otlp
• opentelemetry-sdk-common

Please review the changes in docs/apidiffs/current_vs_latest/ carefully before approving.

[jack-berg]

I was happy to see a nearly identical API from armeria

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 94.66667% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 91.64%. Comparing base (09d6c17) to head (dff3e33).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ry/exporter/sender/jdk/internal/JdkHttpSender.java	80.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...orter/sender/okhttp/internal/OkHttpGrpcSender.java	87.50%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...orter/sender/okhttp/internal/OkHttpHttpSender.java	93.75%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...ntelemetry/sdk/common/export/HttpSenderConfig.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main    #8610   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     91.64%   91.64%           
- Complexity    10348    10372   +24     
=========================================
  Files          1013     1013           
  Lines         27380    27441   +61     
  Branches       3218     3230   +12     
=========================================
+ Hits          25092    25149   +57     
- Misses         1558     1559    +1     
- Partials        730      733    +3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[opentelemetry-pr-dashboard]

Pull request dashboard status

Status last refreshed: 2026-07-26 01:45:35 UTC.

• Waiting on: Reviewers
• Next step: Review the latest changes.

This automated status or its linked feedback items may be incorrect. If something looks wrong, please report it with the result you expected.

[adhamahmad]

Hey @jack-berg, thanks for the detailed analysis.

I had one question about test coverage: is there a test that verifies the actual motivating scenario from #7573 — successfully reaching a real TLSv1/TLSv1.1-only server with enabledProtocols set and the JVM floor opened?

As written, enabledProtocols() only exercises TLS 1.2/1.3 against a TLS 1.2/1.3 server, which would still pass if setEnabledProtocols() were a no-op since that is already the default range.
I don't see a test covering the full "both gates open" scenario against a legacy server, which was the original bug report.

I ran into a related issue testing this in my PR: jdk.tls.disabledAlgorithms behavior is JVM-wide, and changing it at runtime can be problematic once TLS initialization has already happened. That made a legacy-server test order-dependent in practice.
If that is why this scenario was intentionally omitted, that makes sense as a stability tradeoff.

I just wanted to confirm whether that was the reasoning, or if I missed an existing test covering it.

[jack-berg]

Hi @adhamahmad -

You make a good point. I updated the abstract http / grpc test classes to verify that when you restrict protocols to TLSv1.1, export fails. This ensures that the senders are indeed restricting based on protocols. But it doesn't demonstrate the actual motivating scenario from the issue. After reading your comment, I did try to update the abstract tests to recreate that situation but it proved impractical to configure the armeria test server used in those to downgrade to TLS 1.1, such that you could configure a client to use TLS 1.1 and get a successful export.

I ended up added a dedicated simpler scoped test to OkHttpHttpSenderTest in 9394db0 which recreates a server accepting only TLS 1.1 at a lower level. It looks somewhat similar to the test in your PR.