Insticator Bid Adapter: Add support for 2.6rtb request/response by shubhamc-ins · Pull Request #14373 · prebid/Prebid.js

shubhamc-ins · 2026-01-23T11:17:17Z

Type of change

Description of change

Other information

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR adds support for OpenRTB 2.6 request/response fields and video ad-pod handling to the Insticator Bid Adapter. The changes enable the adapter to handle advanced video advertising use cases including ad pods with sequential ads.

Changes:

Added support for ORTB 2.6 ad-pod video parameters (podid, podseq, poddur, slotinpod, mincpmpersec, maxseq, rqddurs)
Enhanced response handling to map ORTB 2.6 fields (category, seat/dsp, creative attributes, deal ID, billing/notice URLs, video duration)
Added publisherId query parameter support for endpoint URLs
Updated TTL logic to use MAX of bid.exp and configured BID_TTL

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File	Description
modules/insticatorBidAdapter.js	Added ORTB 2.6 video ad-pod parameter validation, request mapping for ad-pod fields, response mapping for new ORTB 2.6 fields, and publisherId query parameter handling
test/spec/modules/insticatorBidAdapter_spec.js	Added comprehensive test coverage for publisherId query parameters, ad-pod video parameters, ORTB 2.6 response field mapping, and edge cases for empty responses

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2026-01-23T11:18:00Z

modules/insticatorBidAdapter.js

+      const publisherId = deepAccess(validBidRequests[0], 'params.publisherId');
+      if (publisherId) {
+        const urlObj = new URL(endpointUrl);
+        urlObj.searchParams.set('publisherId', publisherId);
+        endpointUrl = urlObj.toString();
+      }


The publisherId check on line 724 does not filter out empty strings. When publisherId is an empty string, it will still be added as a query parameter. Based on the test on line 838-848, empty strings should not be included in the URL.

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: e09f726566

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-01-23T11:19:27Z

modules/insticatorBidAdapter.js

+  // TTL: Use MAX of bid.exp and BID_TTL to ensure minimum 5 minutes
+  const configTTL = config.getConfig('insticator.bidTTL') || BID_TTL;
+  const bidExp = bid.exp || 0;
+  const ttl = Math.max(bidExp, configTTL);


Honor bid.exp as an upper TTL bound

When the exchange includes bid.exp, OpenRTB treats it as the maximum time (seconds after the auction) that the bid is valid. Using Math.max(bid.exp, configTTL) can extend TTL beyond what the bidder allowed (e.g., exp=60 becomes ttl=300), which risks serving expired creatives and violating bidder contracts. This is introduced by the new MAX logic; consider using Math.min or otherwise treating bid.exp as an upper bound so shorter expirations are respected.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-01-23T11:19:27Z

modules/insticatorBidAdapter.js

+  const durationRangeSec = deepAccess(bidRequest, 'mediaTypes.video.durationRangeSec');
+  if (durationRangeSec && isArrayOfNums(durationRangeSec) && durationRangeSec.length > 0) {
+    optionalParams['rqddurs'] = durationRangeSec;


Validate durationRangeSec values before mapping

durationRangeSec is mapped directly to rqddurs with only isArrayOfNums checks, which allows zero or negative values through. That bypasses the adapter’s own validation rule for rqddurs (positive-only in OPTIONAL_VIDEO_PARAMS) and can send invalid ORTB 2.6 requests when publishers misconfigure ranges (e.g., [0, -15]). Consider reusing the rqddurs validator or filtering out non-positive entries before assignment.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

coveralls · 2026-01-23T11:31:45Z

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 21300423597

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.

For more information on this, see Tracking coverage changes with pull request builds.
To avoid this issue with future PRs, see these Recommended CI Configurations.
For a quick fix, rebase this PR at GitHub. Your next report should be accurate.

Details

212 of 212 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 2 files are covered.
No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
Overall coverage increased (+0.004%) to 96.219%

Totals
Change from base Build 21265604449:	0.004%
Covered Lines:	208945
Relevant Lines:	217155

💛 - Coveralls

….6 standards

…Prebid.js into update-insticator-for-2.6rtb

shubhamc-ins · 2026-02-11T08:35:47Z

Hey @ncolletti, just checking in. Have you had a chance to review this PR?

Thanks!

patmmccann · 2026-02-12T16:47:38Z

modules/insticatorBidAdapter.js

  'pos': (value) => isInteger(value) && [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7].includes(value),
-  'api': (value) => isArrayOfNums(value)};
+  'api': (value) => isArrayOfNums(value),
+  // Ad Pod specific parameters (ORTB 2.6)


you're not supporting the adpod mediatype above, however we're getting rid of it in 11

@patmmccann thanks for checking. Okay I see

Is there any document I can refer to check, and see what fields are being removed from bidrequest/response related to ad pod? Or in general too.

Thank you

do you have customers using the adpod media type? we're just deleting it altogether in #14451

Thanks for the sharing the PR.
If I understand correct, we need to remove the adpod mediatype mappings. I've removed the Prebid adpod field mappings (adPodDurationSec → poddur, durationRangeSec → rqddurs) from the adapter. The remaining params (poddur, rqddurs, podid, etc.) are kept as standard ORTB 2.6 video fields that can be passed directly.

Please let me know, if I missed anything.
@patmmccann

shubhamc-ins added 3 commits January 22, 2026 00:16

enhance ORTB 2.6 support and enhance bid response handling

b60244e

remove onBidWon

738996e

add tests for handling 204 No Content responses in InsticatorBidAdapter

e09f726

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings January 23, 2026 11:17

Copilot AI reviewed Jan 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

review-assignment-bot bot requested a review from ncolletti January 23, 2026 11:19

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Jan 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

shubhamc-ins and others added 4 commits January 23, 2026 17:04

update InsticatorBidAdapter and improve TTL handling

86882d6

Merge branch 'master' into update-insticator-for-2.6rtb

f357dd5

udpate media type detection in InsticatorBidAdapter to support ORTB 2…

f9ce2f7

….6 standards

Merge branch 'update-insticator-for-2.6rtb' of github.com:Insticator/…

32a34c3

…Prebid.js into update-insticator-for-2.6rtb

patmmccann reviewed Feb 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

remove adpod fields references

9d6ef45

patmmccann changed the title ~~Insticator Bid Adapter: Add support for 2.6rtb request/response and video ad-pod handling~~ Insticator Bid Adapter: Add support for 2.6rtb request/response Feb 26, 2026

patmmccann approved these changes Feb 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

patmmccann merged commit ec41457 into prebid:master Feb 26, 2026
101 of 102 checks passed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Insticator Bid Adapter: Add support for 2.6rtb request/response#14373

Insticator Bid Adapter: Add support for 2.6rtb request/response#14373
patmmccann merged 8 commits intoprebid:masterfrom
Insticator:update-insticator-for-2.6rtb

shubhamc-ins commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

coveralls commented Jan 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

shubhamc-ins commented Feb 11, 2026

Uh oh!

patmmccann Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

shubhamc-ins Feb 18, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

patmmccann Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

shubhamc-ins Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Conversation

shubhamc-ins commented Jan 23, 2026

Type of change

Description of change

Other information

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jan 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Jan 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Jan 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

coveralls commented Jan 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 21300423597

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

Details

💛 - Coveralls

Uh oh!

shubhamc-ins commented Feb 11, 2026

Uh oh!

patmmccann Feb 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shubhamc-ins Feb 18, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

patmmccann Feb 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shubhamc-ins Feb 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

coveralls commented Jan 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

shubhamc-ins Feb 18, 2026 •

edited

Loading