Skip to content
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

Ensure endpoints are returned when alternate url port does not match #2511

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 17, 2024

Conversation

mregen
Copy link
Contributor

@mregen mregen commented Feb 11, 2024

Proposed changes

  • Ensure endpoints are returned even if the client url port do not match (similar to client)
  • Improve endpoint tests

Related Issues

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce?
Put an x in the boxes that apply. You can also fill these out after creating the PR.

  • Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • Enhancement (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Test enhancement (non-breaking change to increase test coverage)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected, requires version increase of Nuget packages)
  • Documentation Update (if none of the other choices apply)

Checklist

Put an x in the boxes that apply. You can also fill these out after creating the PR. If you're unsure about any of them, don't hesitate to ask. We're here to help! This is simply a reminder of what we are going to look for before merging your code.

  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING doc.
  • I have signed the CLA.
  • I ran tests locally with my changes, all passed.
  • I fixed all failing tests in the CI pipelines.
  • I fixed all introduced issues with CodeQL and LGTM.
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works and increased code coverage.
  • I have added necessary documentation (if appropriate).
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules.

Further comments

If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...

@mregen mregen added this to the 1.5.373 February Update milestone Feb 11, 2024
@mregen mregen marked this pull request as ready for review February 11, 2024 20:15
@mregen mregen requested a review from mrsuciu February 11, 2024 20:15
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 14, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (2b9d8f9) 53.81% compared to head (d15011c) 53.97%.

Files Patch % Lines
Libraries/Opc.Ua.Client/CoreClientUtils.cs 50.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2511      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   53.81%   53.97%   +0.16%     
==========================================
  Files         334      334              
  Lines       64409    64424      +15     
  Branches    13235    13239       +4     
==========================================
+ Hits        34663    34775     +112     
+ Misses      25990    25903      -87     
+ Partials     3756     3746      -10     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@mregen mregen merged commit 61edad9 into master Feb 17, 2024
70 of 72 checks passed
@mregen mregen deleted the endpoints branch February 17, 2024 06:31
catch (SocketException e)
{
Utils.LogWarning(e, "Unable to get host addresses for hostname {0}.", hostname);
}
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should have been computerName

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

OPC UA Server with https-uabinary behind a reverseproxy with different port
2 participants