Adding support for IPv6 encapsulation to Everflow packet mirroring tests#16836
Merged
bingwang-ms merged 8 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom Feb 21, 2025
Merged
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Contributor
Author
|
@bingwang-ms Please review this PR. |
Contributor
Author
|
@prsunny Please review this PR. |
Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
prsunny
reviewed
Feb 7, 2025
Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
bingwang-ms
reviewed
Feb 13, 2025
bingwang-ms
reviewed
Feb 13, 2025
Collaborator
|
Please run the test on at least 1 platform and paste the output in this PR since this is a new scenario. Thanks! |
…ying received packets. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Contributor
Author
|
Test results on a T0 switch with Broadcom TD3 ASIC: Notes:
|
Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
Cherry-pick PR to msft-202412: Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft#132 |
mssonicbld
added
Included in msft-202412 Branch
and removed
Created PR to msft-202412 Branch
labels
nnelluri-cisco
pushed a commit
to nnelluri-cisco/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 15, 2025
…sts (sonic-net#16836) * Added support for IPv6 encapsulation to Everflow packet mirroring tests. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
nhe-NV
added a commit
to nhe-NV/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 26, 2025
In the PR sonic-net#16836, new parameter is added to the test_everflow_per_interface, so the original skip could not work for the ipv6, update it
11 tasks
nhe-NV
added a commit
to nhe-NV/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 6, 2025
In the PR sonic-net#16836, new parameter is added to the test_everflow_per_interface, so the original skip could not work for the ipv6, update it
bingwang-ms
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2025
In the PR #16836, new parameter is added to the test_everflow_per_interface, so the original skip could not work for the ipv6, update it
11 tasks
wangxin
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 22, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? Everflow tests take a lot of time to execute. After adding IPv6 test cases (#16836), the execution time has roughly doubled. Now it takes more than 2 hours to run all tests in everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py. Since these tests are part of PR tests, if they take too long to run, the PR test will be cancelled. This PR skips the IPv6 Everflow tests on KVM testbeds (which are used for PR tests) to address this issue. Note: The IPv6 Everflow tests will still run during nightly tests. How did you do it? Added a new pytest fixture that will skip the tests when erspan_ip_ver == 6 and the DUT is a virtual switch. How did you verify/test it? Ran the tests to ensure that the tests will be skipped when erspan_ip_ver == 6. Any platform specific information? Only applies to KVM testbeds ("vs" ASIC). Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
mssonicbld
pushed a commit
to mssonicbld/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
May 22, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? Everflow tests take a lot of time to execute. After adding IPv6 test cases (sonic-net#16836), the execution time has roughly doubled. Now it takes more than 2 hours to run all tests in everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py. Since these tests are part of PR tests, if they take too long to run, the PR test will be cancelled. This PR skips the IPv6 Everflow tests on KVM testbeds (which are used for PR tests) to address this issue. Note: The IPv6 Everflow tests will still run during nightly tests. How did you do it? Added a new pytest fixture that will skip the tests when erspan_ip_ver == 6 and the DUT is a virtual switch. How did you verify/test it? Ran the tests to ensure that the tests will be skipped when erspan_ip_ver == 6. Any platform specific information? Only applies to KVM testbeds ("vs" ASIC). Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
11 tasks
yejianquan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 22, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? Everflow tests take a lot of time to execute. After adding IPv6 test cases (#16836), the execution time has roughly doubled. Now it takes more than 2 hours to run all tests in everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py. Since these tests are part of PR tests, if they take too long to run, the PR test will be cancelled. This PR skips the IPv6 Everflow tests on KVM testbeds (which are used for PR tests) to address this issue. Note: The IPv6 Everflow tests will still run during nightly tests. How did you do it? Added a new pytest fixture that will skip the tests when erspan_ip_ver == 6 and the DUT is a virtual switch. How did you verify/test it? Ran the tests to ensure that the tests will be skipped when erspan_ip_ver == 6. Any platform specific information? Only applies to KVM testbeds ("vs" ASIC). Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: mramezani95 <[email protected]>
AharonMalkin
pushed a commit
to AharonMalkin/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
May 22, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? Everflow tests take a lot of time to execute. After adding IPv6 test cases (sonic-net#16836), the execution time has roughly doubled. Now it takes more than 2 hours to run all tests in everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py. Since these tests are part of PR tests, if they take too long to run, the PR test will be cancelled. This PR skips the IPv6 Everflow tests on KVM testbeds (which are used for PR tests) to address this issue. Note: The IPv6 Everflow tests will still run during nightly tests. How did you do it? Added a new pytest fixture that will skip the tests when erspan_ip_ver == 6 and the DUT is a virtual switch. How did you verify/test it? Ran the tests to ensure that the tests will be skipped when erspan_ip_ver == 6. Any platform specific information? Only applies to KVM testbeds ("vs" ASIC). Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
mssonicbld
pushed a commit
to mssonicbld/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
May 27, 2025
In the PR sonic-net#16836, new parameter is added to the test_everflow_per_interface, so the original skip could not work for the ipv6, update it
11 tasks
mssonicbld
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 27, 2025
In the PR #16836, new parameter is added to the test_everflow_per_interface, so the original skip could not work for the ipv6, update it
11 tasks
11 tasks
opcoder0
pushed a commit
to opcoder0/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 8, 2025
In the PR sonic-net#16836, new parameter is added to the test_everflow_per_interface, so the original skip could not work for the ipv6, update it Signed-off-by: opcoder0 <[email protected]>
opcoder0
pushed a commit
to opcoder0/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 8, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? Everflow tests take a lot of time to execute. After adding IPv6 test cases (sonic-net#16836), the execution time has roughly doubled. Now it takes more than 2 hours to run all tests in everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py. Since these tests are part of PR tests, if they take too long to run, the PR test will be cancelled. This PR skips the IPv6 Everflow tests on KVM testbeds (which are used for PR tests) to address this issue. Note: The IPv6 Everflow tests will still run during nightly tests. How did you do it? Added a new pytest fixture that will skip the tests when erspan_ip_ver == 6 and the DUT is a virtual switch. How did you verify/test it? Ran the tests to ensure that the tests will be skipped when erspan_ip_ver == 6. Any platform specific information? Only applies to KVM testbeds ("vs" ASIC). Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]>
AharonMalkin
pushed a commit
to AharonMalkin/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 16, 2025
In the PR sonic-net#16836, new parameter is added to the test_everflow_per_interface, so the original skip could not work for the ipv6, update it Signed-off-by: Aharon Malkin <[email protected]>
AharonMalkin
pushed a commit
to AharonMalkin/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 16, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? Everflow tests take a lot of time to execute. After adding IPv6 test cases (sonic-net#16836), the execution time has roughly doubled. Now it takes more than 2 hours to run all tests in everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py. Since these tests are part of PR tests, if they take too long to run, the PR test will be cancelled. This PR skips the IPv6 Everflow tests on KVM testbeds (which are used for PR tests) to address this issue. Note: The IPv6 Everflow tests will still run during nightly tests. How did you do it? Added a new pytest fixture that will skip the tests when erspan_ip_ver == 6 and the DUT is a virtual switch. How did you verify/test it? Ran the tests to ensure that the tests will be skipped when erspan_ip_ver == 6. Any platform specific information? Only applies to KVM testbeds ("vs" ASIC). Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Aharon Malkin <[email protected]>
gshemesh2
pushed a commit
to gshemesh2/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 21, 2025
In the PR sonic-net#16836, new parameter is added to the test_everflow_per_interface, so the original skip could not work for the ipv6, update it Signed-off-by: Guy Shemesh <[email protected]>
gshemesh2
pushed a commit
to gshemesh2/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 21, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? Everflow tests take a lot of time to execute. After adding IPv6 test cases (sonic-net#16836), the execution time has roughly doubled. Now it takes more than 2 hours to run all tests in everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py. Since these tests are part of PR tests, if they take too long to run, the PR test will be cancelled. This PR skips the IPv6 Everflow tests on KVM testbeds (which are used for PR tests) to address this issue. Note: The IPv6 Everflow tests will still run during nightly tests. How did you do it? Added a new pytest fixture that will skip the tests when erspan_ip_ver == 6 and the DUT is a virtual switch. How did you verify/test it? Ran the tests to ensure that the tests will be skipped when erspan_ip_ver == 6. Any platform specific information? Only applies to KVM testbeds ("vs" ASIC). Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Guy Shemesh <[email protected]>
gshemesh2
pushed a commit
to gshemesh2/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 26, 2026
In the PR sonic-net#16836, new parameter is added to the test_everflow_per_interface, so the original skip could not work for the ipv6, update it Signed-off-by: Guy Shemesh <[email protected]>
gshemesh2
pushed a commit
to gshemesh2/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 26, 2026
What is the motivation for this PR? Everflow tests take a lot of time to execute. After adding IPv6 test cases (sonic-net#16836), the execution time has roughly doubled. Now it takes more than 2 hours to run all tests in everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py. Since these tests are part of PR tests, if they take too long to run, the PR test will be cancelled. This PR skips the IPv6 Everflow tests on KVM testbeds (which are used for PR tests) to address this issue. Note: The IPv6 Everflow tests will still run during nightly tests. How did you do it? Added a new pytest fixture that will skip the tests when erspan_ip_ver == 6 and the DUT is a virtual switch. How did you verify/test it? Ran the tests to ensure that the tests will be skipped when erspan_ip_ver == 6. Any platform specific information? Only applies to KVM testbeds ("vs" ASIC). Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Guy Shemesh <[email protected]>
Pterosaur
pushed a commit
to Pterosaur/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 26, 2026
In the PR sonic-net#16836, new parameter is added to the test_everflow_per_interface, so the original skip could not work for the ipv6, update it
Pterosaur
pushed a commit
to Pterosaur/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 26, 2026
In the PR sonic-net#16836, new parameter is added to the test_everflow_per_interface, so the original skip could not work for the ipv6, update it
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.
Description of PR
Summary:
Microsoft ADO id: 30441649
After PR 3317 in sonic-swss repo, it is possible to configure ERSPAN sessions with IPv6 source and destination addresses. This PR parametrizes existing Everflow tests with the IP version of the mirrored GRE packets (i.e., the version of the outer IP header).
Type of change
Back port request
Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
Adding support for IPv6 encapsulation to Everflow packet mirroring tests.
How did you do it?
Parametrized existing Everflow tests with the IP version of the outer IP header.
How did you verify/test it?
Tested on Broadcom T0.
Any platform specific information?
N/A
Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?
T0, T1, T2, and M0
Documentation
N/A