Hi Pavel!
All looks good to me!
Do you want to change ie. -> i.e. here as well:
src/java.base/windows/native/libnet/net_util_md.c
- * 2. If the reqeusted port is 0 (*ie*. any port) then we try to bind
in v4 space
+ * 2. If the requested port is 0 (*ie*. any port) then we try to bind
in v4 space
And a couple more of duplicate words to remove:
jdk/internal/net/http/Http1AsyncReceiver.java: // If the queue is
not empty, wait until *it it* is empty before
jdk/internal/net/http/Http2Connection.java: // if true, *the the*
stream may be assigned to this connection
With kind regards,
Ivan
On 11/12/18 3:51 PM, Pavel Rappo wrote:
Daniel, Alan,
I excluded the update from the draft to the RFC and created a separate bug
for it:
[P5] 8213757: Investigate the possibility of updating the reference to the
spec in java.net.Inet6Address
I added the changes to the URI class from JDK-8213490, which then effectively
became a duplicate. Please have a look at the result here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/8213490/webrev.01/
-Pavel
On 12 Nov 2018, at 18:14, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote:
On 12/11/2018 17:30, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Hi Pavel,
The typos fixes look OK to me - I'll let Michael/Chris?
who have more knowledge on the history of the Inet6Address
impl to validate the new link - though I suspect that's OK.
It will need a CSR because it changes Inet6Address to specify that it can be
extended with scoped addresses described by RFC 4007. It might need analysis to
understand the differences between the draft and RFC 4007 (just in case it
brings up implementation or conformance test issues).
-Alan
--
With kind regards,
Ivan Gerasimov
