Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Handle IPv6-addresses correctly in checkHost() #1026

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 9, 2017

Conversation

usefulthink
Copy link
Contributor

What kind of change does this PR introduce?
bugfix

Did you add or update the examples/?
no

Summary

Add proper handling of IPv6-addresses to the checkHost()-method. Like
IPv4-addresses, IPv6 addresses are always allowed.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

no

Other information

Addresses @trygveaa's comment: #1007 (comment)

Add proper handling of IPv6-addresses to the checkHost()-method. Like
IPv4-addresses, IPv6 addresses are always allowed.
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 8, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #1026 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1026   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   72.25%   72.25%           
=======================================
  Files           4        4           
  Lines         465      465           
  Branches      140      139    -1     
=======================================
  Hits          336      336           
  Misses        129      129
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
lib/Server.js 79.81% <100%> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 65f0586...04c6c76. Read the comment docs.

@shellscape
Copy link
Contributor

@usefulthink fantastic PR, thank you for getting this one in.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants