Skip to content

Define valid IPv6-address string inline - #917

Merged
annevk merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
annevk/valid-ipv6
Jul 1, 2026
Merged

annevk merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
annevk/valid-ipv6

Conversation

@annevk

@annevk annevk commented Jun 30, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Fixes #916.


Preview | Diff

@annevk
annevk requested a review from domenic June 30, 2026 12:38
@annevk annevk added the topic: validation Pertaining to the rules for URL writing and validity (as opposed to parsing) label Jun 30, 2026

@domenic domenic left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, but as noted in #916, it may be worth mentioning that the [v7.a] host form (http://[v7.a]/) from RFC 3986 is disallowed.

@annevk
annevk merged commit b2965a0 into main Jul 1, 2026
2 checks passed
@annevk
annevk deleted the annevk/valid-ipv6 branch July 1, 2026 05:27
@annevk

annevk commented Jul 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

I want to create an appendix to list differences from 3986.

domenic added a commit to jsdom/whatwg-url that referenced this pull request Jul 1, 2026
Follows whatwg/url#917.

Co-authored-by: codex <codex@openai.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

topic: validation Pertaining to the rules for URL writing and validity (as opposed to parsing)

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

RFC 4291 is not really sufficient to define "valid IPv6-address string"

2 participants