[Dageus]

Which issue does this PR address?

Closes #4845

Rationale

The Rust SDK rejects port 0 when parsing a connection string, but the Node SDK accepted it and only failed later on connect. Both SDKs should reject the same inputs at parse time.

What changed?

Previously, the Node SDK's parseConnectionString accepted port 0 , which is a reserved port. This PR adds a small check for port == 0, blocking that path.

The malformed-input test now covers :0 and :65536 (replacing :70000, so the upper bound is tested exactly), and a new test checks that :1 and :65535 still parse, although the happy path test may be unnecessary and am happy to remove it if it's overkill.

Local Execution

• Passed: npm run test:unit and npm run lint in foreign/node (Node 24)
• Pre-commit hooks ran: prek run passed (license headers, typos, node eslint, whitespace/newline, binary artifacts, skills)

AI Usage

Claude was used to make my PR message clearer.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 91.34%. Comparing base (167dcd1) to head (548ba05).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #4846   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     91.34%   91.34%           
  Complexity     3875     3875           
=========================================
  Files          1451     1451           
  Lines        334425   334425           
  Branches     268282   268282           
=========================================
+ Hits         305495   305496    +1     
+ Misses        22716    22715    -1     
  Partials       6214     6214           

Components	Coverage Δ
Rust Core	92.99% <ø> (ø)
Java SDK	79.36% <ø> (ø)
C# SDK	84.48% <ø> (ø)
Python SDK	86.52% <ø> (ø)
PHP SDK	92.23% <ø> (ø)
Node SDK	96.76% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
Go SDK	71.80% <ø> (ø)
C++ SDK	86.84% <ø> (ø)

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...oreign/node/src/client/client.connection-string.ts	99.17% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

Thanks for the PR. It is labeled S-waiting-on-review and queued for review.

If AI assistance was used to create this PR, you are required to run the team-review skill before opening it.

Slash commands (own line, regular comment) move it around the queue:

• /ready - back to S-waiting-on-review after addressing feedback
• /author - flip to S-waiting-on-author while you finish changes
• /request-review @user-or-team - request a reviewer
• /pin - exempt the PR from the stale bot, /unpin to undo

See CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

[justinmclean]

Thanks @Dageus, and welcome. Matching the Rust SDK, which already rejects port 0, is a good fix, and testing 65536 instead of 70000 pins the upper bound exactly. The happy path test for 1 and 65535 is worth keeping.