Skip to content

[FRR]: Verifying static SRv6 SIDs parameters#21467

Merged
lguohan merged 1 commit intosonic-net:masterfrom
cscarpitta:verify_srv6_sids
Jan 21, 2025
Merged

[FRR]: Verifying static SRv6 SIDs parameters#21467
lguohan merged 1 commit intosonic-net:masterfrom
cscarpitta:verify_srv6_sids

Conversation

@cscarpitta
Copy link
Contributor

@cscarpitta cscarpitta commented Jan 17, 2025

The FRR CLI to support SRv6 Static SIDs has been merged in FRR mainline in this PR (FRRouting/frr#16894). The CLI has been ported into SONiC mainline in this PR (#21380).
This PR verifies the SRv6 Static SIDs configured by the above FRR CLI. It verifies that the block and node parts of the configured SID matches block and node parts of the locator it belongs to. The PR computes the parameters that will be installed with the SID into APPL DB. The changes in this PR will be also added into FRR mainline.

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <cscarpit@cisco.com>
@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/azp run Azure.sonic-buildimage

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@ahsalam
Copy link

ahsalam commented Jan 17, 2025

@abdosi @BYGX-wcr

@cscarpitta cscarpitta marked this pull request as ready for review January 17, 2025 22:04
@cscarpitta cscarpitta requested a review from lguohan as a code owner January 17, 2025 22:04
Copy link
Contributor

@BYGX-wcr BYGX-wcr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tested internally

@abdosi
Copy link
Contributor

abdosi commented Jan 18, 2025

@cscarpitta : Please add some PR description. Also are these changes already in FRR mainline ?

@cscarpitta
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cscarpitta : Please add some PR description. Also are these changes already in FRR mainline ?

Hi @abdosi thanks for the review. I updated the PR description.

@r12f
Copy link
Contributor

r12f commented Jan 22, 2025

local cherry-pick looks good. retry labeling this PR.

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

Cherry-pick PR to msft-202412: Azure/sonic-buildimage-msft#542

bradh352 added a commit to bradh352/sonic-swss that referenced this pull request Jan 25, 2025
As of sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21467
some tests are failing due to a validation that
`block-len+node-len = locator-len`.  However in some of the test
cases this wasn't actually true, meaning the tests were invalid
as designed.

Update the test cases to be valid.

Signed-off-by: Brad House (@bradh352)
bradh352 added a commit to bradh352/sonic-swss that referenced this pull request Jan 25, 2025
As of sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21467
some tests are failing due to a validation that
`block-len+node-len = locator-len`.  However in some of the test
cases this wasn't actually true, meaning the tests were invalid
as designed.

Update the test cases to be valid.

Signed-off-by: Brad House (@bradh352)
bradh352 added a commit to bradh352/sonic-swss that referenced this pull request Jan 25, 2025
As of sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21467
some tests are failing due to a validation that
`block-len+node-len = locator-len`.  However in some of the test
cases this wasn't actually true, meaning the tests were invalid
as designed.

Update the test cases to be valid.

Signed-off-by: Brad House (@bradh352)
bradh352 added a commit to bradh352/sonic-swss that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2025
As of sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21467
some tests are failing due to a validation that
`block-len+node-len = locator-len`.  However in some of the test
cases this wasn't actually true, meaning the tests were invalid
as designed.

Update the test cases to be valid.

Signed-off-by: Brad House (@bradh352)
bradh352 added a commit to bradh352/sonic-swss that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2025
As of sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21467
some tests are failing due to a validation that
`block-len+node-len = locator-len`.  However in some of the test
cases this wasn't actually true, meaning the tests were invalid
as designed.

Update the test cases to be valid by this logic.

Should also universally wait for interface deletion at tear down
to make sure it doesn't cause failures in the next test.

Signed-off-by: Brad House (@bradh352)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants