Repository navigation
dns: remove dns.lookup and dnsPromises.lookup options type coercion - #41431
Conversation
commented
Jan 7, 2022
|
Review requested:
|
740a691 to
8e53d29
Compare
commented
Apr 3, 2022
8e53d29 to
13c8788
Compare
commented
Apr 3, 2022
commented
Apr 3, 2022
|
@nodejs/tsc can we get this into v18.x? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm concerned about these two specific changes, moving from IPv4 to 4 and IPv6 to 6. I'm 100% sure those will break some of my modules (Fastify v4).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason for this change is that currently passing an address object to the DNS resolver, the 'IPv6' string is converted to 0.
Would it be reasonable to ask you to update the code that using that to expect one form or the other? Something like info.family === 6 || info.family === 'IPv6'? If not, we could make the DNS resolver accept a string and interpret 'IPv6' same as 6.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I assume this change will hurt the community a lot.
I personally would see this:
If not, we could make the DNS resolver accept a string and interpret 'IPv6' same as 6.
as the better solution
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agreed here. I realize that Node v18 was a major version change, but changing the output of a widely used API (socket.address()) just so another core-Node API could match up with it instead of making the DNS resolver more flexible seems pretty overkill!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now that it's out in the wild, can confirm it caused some widespread breaking for us that's going to make node 18 a pain and very uncertain to roll out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I assume this change will hurt the community a lot.
Can confirm completely unexpected breakage
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe a new issue is more visible to the nodejs team and allows a better discussion ... so see #43014 ... Please "thumbs up" it if you support to adjust this to be backward compatible. Thank you
13c8788 to
84164de
Compare
commented
Apr 4, 2022
|
CITGM ( |
commented
Apr 6, 2022
commented
Apr 8, 2022
commented
Apr 8, 2022
|
@aduh95 If it helps the failures in the recent CI runs for this PR have all been running inside containers. |
No description provided.