On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
Greetings,
* Stephen Frost (sfrost@snowman.net) wrote: > * Stephen Frost (sfrost@snowman.net) wrote: > > * Haribabu Kommi (kommi.haribabu@gmail.com) wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Vitaly Burovoy <vitaly.burovoy@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > The new status of this patch is: Ready for Committer > > > > > > Thanks for the review. > > > > I've started taking a look at this with an eye towards committing it > > soon. > > I've spent a good bit of time going over this, possibly even more than > it was worth, but hopefully we'll see people making use of this data > type with PG10 and as more IPv6 deployment happens.
And, naturally, re-reading the email as it hit the list made me realize that the documentation/error-message incorrectly said "3rd and 4th" bytes were being set to FF and FE, when it's actually the 4th and 5th byte. The code was correct, just the documentation and the error message had the wrong numbers. The commit message is also correct.
Thanks for the review and corrections.
I found some small corrections.
s/4rd/4th/g -- Type correction.
+ Input is accepted in the following formats:
As we are supporting many different input variants, and all combinations
are not listed, so how about changing the above statement as below.
"Following are the some of the input formats that are accepted:"
I didn't find any other problems during testing and review. The patch
