[action] [PR:21760] Fix test_acl.py [ipv6-ingress-uplink->downlink-*] cases for v6 topo

[mssonicbld]

Description of PR

Summary:
t0-isolated-v6-*:
Downstream neighbors are servers connected to VLAN interface. Use DOWNSTREAM_DST_IP_VLAN as dest ips. IPv6 cases have been skipped for t0 since beginning, only fix it for v6 topos now.

t1-isolated-v6-*:
V6 topo files set ipv6_address_pattern: 2064:100:0::%02X%02X:%02X%02X:0/120.
announce_routes.py uses the pattern to generate routes for PTF and pass them to VMs. If it is not set, default pattern 20%02X:%02X%02X:0:%02X::/64 is used.
acl tests use hardcoded dest ip 20c0:a800::1 that is not covered by v6 topo pattern, so packets are forwarded with the default route to upstream VM.
Fix it by changing dest ip for v6 topos, also add acl rules for these dest ips.

With extra ACL rules for v6 topos, also increase timeout for check_rule_counters.
Fixes #21770

Type of change

• Bug fix
• Testbed and Framework(new/improvement)
• New Test case
• Skipped for non-supported platforms
• Test case improvement

Back port request

• 202412
• 202505

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

test_acl.py [ipv6-ingress-uplink->downlink-*] cases failed on v6 topo

How did you do it?

Correct DOWNSTREAM_DST_IP for t0/t1-isolated-v6-*. topos, and add corresponding acl rules

How did you verify/test it?

Test passed on t0/t1-isolated-v6-*. topos

Any platform specific information?

Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?

Documentation

[mssonicbld]

Original PR: #21760

[mssonicbld]

/azp run

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

[radha-danda]

/azpw run Azure.sonic-mgmt

[StormLiangMS]

/azp run Azure.sonic-mgmt

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines will not run the associated pipelines, because the pull request was updated after the run command was issued. Review the pull request again and issue a new run command.

[StormLiangMS]

/azp run Azure.sonic-mgmt

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

[StormLiangMS]

@markx-arista This cherry-pick PR for 202511 has been failing the Pre_test Validate Test Cases step. The previous build (Feb 25) expired so we can't see the exact validation error, but a new CI run has been triggered.

Could you check if the test_acl.py changes or the J2 templates (acltb_v6_test_rules.j2, acltb_v6_test_rules_part_2.j2) have any marker or syntax issues that might not pass validation on the 202511 branch? The original PR #21760 targeted master — there may be a conflict or missing dependency on 202511.

If the validation fails again on this new run, please take a look. Thanks!

[markx-arista]

@markx-arista This cherry-pick PR for 202511 has been failing the Pre_test Validate Test Cases step. The previous build (Feb 25) expired so we can't see the exact validation error, but a new CI run has been triggered.

Could you check if the test_acl.py changes or the J2 templates (acltb_v6_test_rules.j2, acltb_v6_test_rules_part_2.j2) have any marker or syntax issues that might not pass validation on the 202511 branch? The original PR #21760 targeted master — there may be a conflict or missing dependency on 202511.

If the validation fails again on this new run, please take a look. Thanks!

Hi, all checks have passed now.