What is the issue with the URL Pattern Standard?
This has been noticed at least twice now and probably merits its own issue:
#239 (comment)
#258
Most notable, hostname parts that look like IP addresses can end up being canonicalized into full IP addresses in ways that are surprising and nonsensical, like 192.168.* expanding to 192.0.0.168.* (because technically 192.168 is a valid IP address notation).
As noted in the comment, the same is true of port, but it's harder to discover how to work around it for hostnames.
What is the issue with the URL Pattern Standard?
This has been noticed at least twice now and probably merits its own issue:
#239 (comment)
#258
Most notable, hostname parts that look like IP addresses can end up being canonicalized into full IP addresses in ways that are surprising and nonsensical, like
192.168.*expanding to192.0.0.168.*(because technically192.168is a valid IP address notation).As noted in the comment, the same is true of port, but it's harder to discover how to work around it for hostnames.