[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] Add a unit test for ast_sockaddr_split_hostport

[wdoekes]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1575/#review4745
-----------------------------------------------------------



/branches/1.8/tests/test_netsock2.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1575/#comment8928>

    Another test with this with a port perhaps?



/branches/1.8/tests/test_netsock2.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1575/#comment8926>

    This feels awkward.
    
    Shouldn't these v6 addresses always be enclosed in brackets?
    
    If there are cases that this should be allowed, I'd like a couple of more test cases that fail below, like:
    "1234:5678"
    "1234::4567::7890"
    Or should they be matched, and if so, to what?
    
    Otherwise I would just say that all addresses that do not start with '[' should be split by the first or last ':'.



/branches/1.8/tests/test_netsock2.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1575/#comment8927>

    These tests could use the [ipv6] versions of the test as well.


- wdoekes


On Nov. 8, 2011, 11:43 p.m., Terry Wilson wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1575/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 8, 2011, 11:43 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers and Simon Perreault.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> Adds a unit tests for ast_sockaddr_split_hostport.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /branches/1.8/tests/test_netsock2.c 343673 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1575/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Test passes.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Terry
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20111109/20803a53/attachment-0001.htm>