grpc-js: Add support for ipv4 and ipv6 schemes #1752
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| logging.trace(LogVerbosity.DEBUG, TRACER_NAME, text); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| const IPV4_SCHEME = 'ipv4'; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorts of feels weird that these are private strings here, but I guess there might not be any needs to expose a list of all the known schemes somewhere.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If they were going to be exposed in any way, it would probably be through the registerResolver function, so the string constants in this file would still be private.
nicolasnoble
approved these changes
Apr 20, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This adds support for the
ipv4andipv6schemes as described in the naming doc. These schemes support multiple addresses in a single target string, and uniquely, multiple different ports. This makes it much easier to meaningfully test the round_robin load balancing policy, and in particular #1728.