[bgp-cfgd] BGP allow list enhancement#11586
Merged
StormLiangMS merged 2 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom Aug 11, 2022
Merged
Conversation
yxieca
reviewed
Aug 4, 2022
yxieca
reviewed
Aug 4, 2022
Contributor
|
what is meant for different neighbor type ? Allow list is for T0 neighbor type |
prsunny
reviewed
Aug 5, 2022
| """ | ||
| if community_value == BGPAllowListMgr.EMPTY_COMMUNITY: | ||
| community_name = BGPAllowListMgr.EMPTY_COMMUNITY | ||
| if neighbor_type == '': |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
just thinking, why not ignore neighbor_type completely and use the existing flow? Will there be any conflicts?
For e.g:
ip prefix-list PL_ALLOW_LIST_DEPLOYMENT_ID_5_COMMUNITY_empty_V4 seq 10 deny 0.0.0.0/0 le 17
instead of
ip prefix-list PL_ALLOW_LIST_DEPLOYMENT_ID_5_NEIGHBOR_OpticalLonghaulTerminal_COMMUNITY_empty_V4 seq 10 deny 0.0.0.0/0 le 17
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@prsunny The neighbor of Mgmt ToR could be T1 or OLT, to add neighbor type info to tell the difference. Since it is possible to add different allow prefix list towards T1.
prsunny
approved these changes
Aug 9, 2022
yxieca
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 11, 2022
Why I did it 2 things are missing in current allow-prefix list implementation. In some usecase, need to tell the BGP neighbor and have different allow-prefix list for different neighbors, which is not supported. for the prefix list, can't support flexible le and ge. How I did it To enhance the bgp allow-prefix list feature to have: To include the neighbor type info for the allow-prefix list. To support flexible le and ge length for allow-prefix list. How to verify it 4 new unit test cases are added in this PR to cover changes.
qiluo-msft
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 11, 2022
Why I did it 2 things are missing in current allow-prefix list implementation. In some usecase, need to tell the BGP neighbor and have different allow-prefix list for different neighbors, which is not supported. for the prefix list, can't support flexible le and ge. How I did it To enhance the bgp allow-prefix list feature to have: To include the neighbor type info for the allow-prefix list. To support flexible le and ge length for allow-prefix list. How to verify it 4 new unit test cases are added in this PR to cover changes.
skbarista
pushed a commit
to skbarista/sonic-buildimage
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 17, 2022
Why I did it 2 things are missing in current allow-prefix list implementation. In some usecase, need to tell the BGP neighbor and have different allow-prefix list for different neighbors, which is not supported. for the prefix list, can't support flexible le and ge. How I did it To enhance the bgp allow-prefix list feature to have: To include the neighbor type info for the allow-prefix list. To support flexible le and ge length for allow-prefix list. How to verify it 4 new unit test cases are added in this PR to cover changes.
yaqiangz
pushed a commit
to yaqiangz/sonic-buildimage
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 14, 2023
Why I did it For mgmt ToR which is connected to OLT, need to have bgp allow-prefix list to control the routes advertisement between OLT and mgmt ToR. How I did it To add new template for this Scenario, which is based on common mgmt ToR BGP template. below is the doc for detailed design. https://microsoft.sharepoint.com/:w:/t/Aznet/EUXF5cffHVtDspT4W0o3ni8Bax5uGLwe5_hRGQnERDYrbg?e=rtmE9c The changes in managers_allow_list.py is a common one and PR in public repo. sonic-net#11586 How to verify it 1. Unit Test Add new unit test cases for new templates. 2. Integration Test To simulate the Scenario in physical TB, and verify the run bgp configuration. WIP, to verify with Optical team. Others Need to port back to 202012 and 202205 branch.
StormLiangMS
pushed a commit
to StormLiangMS/sonic-buildimage
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 1, 2023
Why I did it For mgmt ToR which is connected to OLT, need to have bgp allow-prefix list to control the routes advertisement between OLT and mgmt ToR. How I did it To add new template for this Scenario, which is based on common mgmt ToR BGP template. below is the doc for detailed design. https://microsoft.sharepoint.com/:w:/t/Aznet/EUXF5cffHVtDspT4W0o3ni8Bax5uGLwe5_hRGQnERDYrbg?e=rtmE9c The changes in managers_allow_list.py is a common one and PR in public repo. sonic-net#11586 How to verify it 1. Unit Test Add new unit test cases for new templates. 2. Integration Test To simulate the Scenario in physical TB, and verify the run bgp configuration. WIP, to verify with Optical team. Others Need to port back to 202012 and 202205 branch. Cherry picked from !6446272
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why I did it
2 things are missing in current allow-prefix list implementation.
How I did it
To enhance the bgp allow-prefix list feature to have:
How to verify it
4 new unit test cases are added in this PR to cover changes.
Which release branch to backport (provide reason below if selected)
Description for the changelog
Link to config_db schema for YANG module changes
Yang model changes would be implemented by another PR.
A picture of a cute animal (not mandatory but encouraged)