-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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
tests: Add topotest to validate the sharing of an SRv6 locator among multiple protocols #15679
Conversation
ce0d1ca
to
77b8133
Compare
faa5c70
to
af9bedf
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
looks good
af9bedf
to
480c9d4
Compare
looks like the docker build is failing ... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hello,
Generally SRv6 uSID test looks ok. 1 minor comment.
Resume: This PR demonstrates the advantage to use same SRv6 locator for BGP SRv6 and ISIS SRv6 on the same node.
I retain the next from this PR:
1. BGP SRv6 session is established between rt1 and rt6.
2. ISIS SRv6 on rt1,rt2,rt3,rt4,rt5,rt6.
3. Same locator shared between BGP SRv6 and ISIS SRv6
I assume that the failed status of PR is related to the fact this PR waits before BGP + ISIS extension are going to be merged? Please confirm if the case or provide a fix if there is an issue.
no bgp default ipv4-unicast | ||
! | ||
address-family ipv6 unicast | ||
sid vpn export 65024 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Minor comment: Why this func value? Is there is anything blocking us to use 65324? The value 65024 might be "out-of-range" for default value range of func (starting from "0xff00" if I remember correctly) particular format uncompressed-f4024? It might be a good thing to avoid confusion in case when user switches the uncompressed-f4024 and consequently there is a risk that related func are failed to allocate?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tu further evolve this point: user should be notified directly if (s)he types the value of out-of-range func.
ci:rerun |
still failing just on docker ... ci:rerun |
ci:rerun |
I don't know if this is a real problem or not:
Can y'all look at this to see what's going on? |
Hi @riw777,
After brief check, it looks like this error starts in the The command itself looks ok ( The error might be seen in case, when |
ci:rerun |
ci:rerun |
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <[email protected]>
480c9d4
to
c7f4753
Compare
ci:rerun |
PR #15604 introduces the SRv6 SID Manager, a zebra component responsible for SID allocation/management. The SRv6 SID Manager exposes a SID allocation/release APIs, allowing clients to request and release an SRv6 SID. The SID manager allows the SRv6 Locator to be shared among many clients such as IS-IS, BGP and others.
This PR adds a new topotest to validate the sharing of an SRv6 locator among multiple clients
It sets up a mixed BGP and IS-IS topology and verifies that the locator can be shared by BGP and IS-IS, and that both daemons are able to request and obtain SIDs from the same locator.