fix: support IPv6 during ClientRequest options parsing #489
Conversation
| ) | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| describe('IP v6', () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I recommend we add a separate test file for IPv6 instead of using describe().
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure!
in utils? ip6.test.ts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We only have a couple of tests for IPv6, so how about this?
it('parses "host" in IPv6')
it('parses "host" and "port" in IPv6')
| const options: RequestOptions = { | ||
| protocol: 'https:', | ||
| hostname: '127.0.0.1:1234', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd be extremely careful around changes like this.
Yes, this is technically right—hostname does not include port. But in practice, I've seen a lot of libraries misuse Node.js. I fear this was one of those cases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@kettanaito, can you give an example? Because it's invalid and Node throws an error immediately:
And this is working:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a good point! Let's remove this old logic and if any issues arise, tackle them separately. I have no notion of supporting hacky tools, and if you use http.request() incorrectly, you are hacky.
| @@ -50,15 +50,6 @@ function getPortByRequestOptions( | |||
| return Number(options.port) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // Extract the port from the hostname. | |||
| if (options.hostname != null) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be options.host instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
host or hostname must not include port, so we can't infer the port from it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🤔 What kind of hackery were we supporting with this.
Ditto, let's remove it as well. Fewer hacks, everyone wins.
kettanaito
changed the title
| return `[${host}]${portString}` | ||
| } | ||
| if (host) { | ||
| if (isRawIPv6Address(host)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@kettanaito Maybe we should use https://nodejs.org/api/net.html#netisipv6input instead?
Released: v0.29.0 🎉This has been released in v0.29.0! Make sure to always update to the latest version ( Predictable release automation by @ossjs/release. |
Following of this comment, I revisited the options parsing rules according to Node.js source and docs, and a few insights:
hostandhostnameare the same, hostname is preferred if both are specified.Domain Nameand doesn't include the port.portin thehost, Node refers to it as part of thehost, and the result is an invalid URL like:http://google.com:1234:80I also added tests for ipv6.
Last, the current implementation only differs from Node.js in that we return an
Invalid URLinstead of firing a bad request. This is due to the fact that we convert options to URL first. However, I believe this behavior is acceptable.should fix #451