Skip to content

net: reference the correct RFCs and sections for IP.IsPrivate #45500

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

6543
Copy link
Contributor

@6543 6543 commented Apr 11, 2021

Properly cite RFC 1918 Section 3 for ipv4,
and RFC 4193 Section 8 for ipv6 comments.

Updates #29146

@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: yes Used by googlebot to label PRs as having a valid CLA. The text of this label should not change. label Apr 11, 2021
@6543
Copy link
Contributor Author

6543 commented Apr 11, 2021

ref: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4193#section-8

@odeke-em If you think there is a better commit msg / pull title just tell me :)

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

This PR (HEAD: 7d4b10c) has been imported to Gerrit for code review.

Please visit https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/309249 to see it.

Tip: You can toggle comments from me using the comments slash command (e.g. /comments off)
See the Wiki page for more info

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

Message from Emmanuel Odeke:

Patch Set 1:

(3 comments)


Please don’t reply on this GitHub thread. Visit golang.org/cl/309249.
After addressing review feedback, remember to publish your drafts!

Properly cite RFC 1918 Section 3 for ipv4,
and RFC 4193 Section 8 for ipv6 comments.

Updates 1c9e587

Signed-off-by: 6543 <[email protected]>
@6543 6543 force-pushed the net/IP.IsPrivate_doc branch from 7d4b10c to b034179 Compare April 11, 2021 04:36
@6543 6543 changed the title net: fix comment of IP.IsPrivate net: reference the correct RFCs and sections for IP.IsPrivate Apr 11, 2021
@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

This PR (HEAD: b034179) has been imported to Gerrit for code review.

Please visit https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/309249 to see it.

Tip: You can toggle comments from me using the comments slash command (e.g. /comments off)
See the Wiki page for more info

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

Message from Emmanuel Odeke:

Patch Set 2: Run-TryBot+1 Code-Review+2

(3 comments)


Please don’t reply on this GitHub thread. Visit golang.org/cl/309249.
After addressing review feedback, remember to publish your drafts!

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

Message from Go Bot:

Patch Set 2:

TryBots beginning. Status page: https://farmer.golang.org/try?commit=7dff2888


Please don’t reply on this GitHub thread. Visit golang.org/cl/309249.
After addressing review feedback, remember to publish your drafts!

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

Message from Go Bot:

Patch Set 2:

Build is still in progress...
This change failed on linux-386:
See https://storage.googleapis.com/go-build-log/7dff2888/linux-386_ca41e45c.log

Other builds still in progress; subsequent failure notices suppressed until final report. Consult https://build.golang.org/ to see whether they are new failures. Keep in mind that TryBots currently test exactly your git commit, without rebasing. If your commit's git parent is old, the failure might've already been fixed.


Please don’t reply on this GitHub thread. Visit golang.org/cl/309249.
After addressing review feedback, remember to publish your drafts!

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

Message from Go Bot:

Patch Set 2: TryBot-Result-1

1 of 23 TryBots failed:
Failed on linux-386: https://storage.googleapis.com/go-build-log/7dff2888/linux-386_ca41e45c.log

Consult https://build.golang.org/ to see whether they are new failures. Keep in mind that TryBots currently test exactly your git commit, without rebasing. If your commit's git parent is old, the failure might've already been fixed.


Please don’t reply on this GitHub thread. Visit golang.org/cl/309249.
After addressing review feedback, remember to publish your drafts!

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

Message from Tobias Klauser:

Patch Set 2:

(1 comment)


Please don’t reply on this GitHub thread. Visit golang.org/cl/309249.
After addressing review feedback, remember to publish your drafts!

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

Message from 6543:

Patch Set 2:

(1 comment)


Please don’t reply on this GitHub thread. Visit golang.org/cl/309249.
After addressing review feedback, remember to publish your drafts!

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

Message from Tobias Klauser:

Patch Set 2:

(2 comments)


Please don’t reply on this GitHub thread. Visit golang.org/cl/309249.
After addressing review feedback, remember to publish your drafts!

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

Message from Tobias Klauser:

Patch Set 2: Code-Review+2


Please don’t reply on this GitHub thread. Visit golang.org/cl/309249.
After addressing review feedback, remember to publish your drafts!

@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

Message from Tobias Klauser:

Patch Set 2:

(1 comment)


Please don’t reply on this GitHub thread. Visit golang.org/cl/309249.
After addressing review feedback, remember to publish your drafts!

gopherbot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 11, 2021
Properly cite RFC 1918 Section 3 for ipv4,
and RFC 4193 Section 8 for ipv6 comments.

Updates #29146

Change-Id: I8a2df0d7bef50444294bb3301fe09fb09f21ffaf
GitHub-Last-Rev: b034179
GitHub-Pull-Request: #45500
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/309249
Reviewed-by: Emmanuel Odeke <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Tobias Klauser <[email protected]>
Run-TryBot: Emmanuel Odeke <[email protected]>
@gopherbot
Copy link
Contributor

This PR is being closed because golang.org/cl/309249 has been merged.

@gopherbot gopherbot closed this Apr 11, 2021
@6543 6543 deleted the net/IP.IsPrivate_doc branch April 12, 2021 11:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cla: yes Used by googlebot to label PRs as having a valid CLA. The text of this label should not change.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants