[test_bgp_multipath_relax] Changed path key due to Frr update

[AndriiLozovyi]

Signed-off-by: Andrii-Yosafat Lozovyi [email protected]

Description of PR

Summary: test_bgp_multipath_relax fails due to updated version of Frr 7.5, and absent keyword 'asPath' in output of cmd vtysh -c 'show ip bgp neighbor 10.0.0.31 adv json'

   "200.0.1.0\/26":{
      "addrPrefix":"200.0.1.0",
      "prefixLen":26,
      "network":"200.0.1.0\/26",
      "nextHop":"0.0.0.0",
      "weight":0,
      "path":"64001 64700",
      "bgpOriginCode":"i",
      "appliedStatusSymbols":{
        "*":true,
        ">":true
      }
    }
  }

E           RunAnsibleModuleFail: run module bgp_route failed, Ansible Results =>
E           {
E               "changed": false, 
E               "failed": true, 
E               "invocation": {
E                   "module_args": {
E                       "direction": "adv", 
E                       "neighbor": "10.0.0.31", 
E                       "prefix": null
E                   }
E               }, 
E               "msg": "cannot correctly parse BGP Routing facts!\n'asPath'"
E           }

Type of change

• Bug fix
• Testbed and Framework(new/improvement)
• Test case(new/improvement)

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

Fix test_bgp_multipath_relax and make it Pass.

How did you do it?

Changed keyword to 'path'

How did you verify/test it?

Run test_bgp_multipath_relax TC on topo t1

bgp/test_bgp_multipath_relax.py::test_bgp_multipath_relax PASSED

Any platform specific information?

SONiC.master.88-dirty-20210108.105001
Distribution: Debian 10.7
Kernel: 4.19.0-9-2-amd64
Build commit: dbc67184
Build date: Fri Jan 8 10:59:56 UTC 2021
Platform: x86_64-arista_7170_64c
HwSKU: Arista-7170-64C

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

Documentation

[AndriiLozovyi]

@yxieca @wangxin could you please take a look?

[SavchukRomanLv]

@bingwang-ms could you please take a look on this also, I believe the problem is the same.

[lguohan]

thanks for the fix! since the same test is running for both master and 201911, can you make the test backward compatible? Thank you in advance. for example, check if 'path' key is there, if not then use 'asPath' key?

[bingwang-ms]

thanks for the fix! since the same test is running for both master and 201911, can you make the test backward compatible? Thank you in advance. for example, check if 'path' key is there, if not then use 'asPath' key?

I have verified that in SONiC.20191130.58.

admin@str-a7060cx-acs-10:~$ vtysh -c 'show ip bgp neighbor 10.0.0.1 adv json'
{
  "bgpTableVersion":9861,
  "bgpLocalRouterId":"10.1.0.32",
  "defaultLocPrf":100,
  "localAS":65100,
  "bgpStatusCodes":{
    "suppressed":"s",
    "damped":"d",
    "history":"h",
    "valid":"*",
    "best":">",
    "multipath":"=",
    "internal":"i",
    "ribFailure":"r",
    "stale":"S",
    "removed":"R"
  },
  "bgpOriginCodes":{
    "igp":"i",
    "egp":"e",
    "incomplete":"?"
  },
  "advertisedRoutes":{
    "10.1.0.32\/32":{
      "addrPrefix":"10.1.0.32",
      "prefixLen":32,
      "network":"10.1.0.32\/32",
      "nextHop":"0.0.0.0",
      "metric":0,
      "weight":32768,
      "asPath":"",
      "path":"",
      "bgpOriginCode":"i",
      "appliedStatusSymbols":{
        "*":true,
        ">":true
      }
    },
    "100.1.0.17\/32":{
      "addrPrefix":"100.1.0.17",
      "prefixLen":32,
      "network":"100.1.0.17\/32",
      "nextHop":"0.0.0.0",
      "weight":0,
      "asPath":"64001",
      "path":"64001",
      "bgpOriginCode":"i",
      "appliedStatusSymbols":{
        "*":true,
        ">":true
      }
    },
    "100.1.0.18\/32":{
      "addrPrefix":"100.1.0.18",
      "prefixLen":32,
      "network":"100.1.0.18\/32",
      "nextHop":"0.0.0.0",
      "weight":0,
      "asPath":"64002",
      "path":"64002",
      "bgpOriginCode":"i",
      "appliedStatusSymbols":{
        "*":true,
        ">":true
      }
    },

We can see that both path and aspath exist. So I think it's OK to keep backward compatible.

[bingwang-ms]

@lguohan Can I merge this PR if you don't have other concerns?