Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

bgpd, zebra: Add support for SRv6 uSID Behaviors #12219

Merged

Conversation

cscarpitta
Copy link
Contributor

SRv6 Network Programming defined in RFC8986 allows to encode any end-to-end policy as a network program. The network program contains a set of instructions. Each instruction is called SID. The SID can be bound to any behavior.

RFC8986 defines a set of SRv6 behaviors including End, End.X, End.DT*, End.DX*, which can be used to deliver several services such as L2VPN/L3VPN, Traffic Engineering, etc.

FRR currently supports L3VPN using SRv6. It supports an SRv6 behavior (known as End.DT4) to deliver L3VPN for IPv4 prefixes. Also, it supports an SRv6 Endpoint (known as End.DT6) to deliver L3VPN services for IPv6 prefixes.

Recently FRR added support to an SRv6 behavior (End.DT46) to deliver L3VPN for both IPv4 and IPv6 prefixes combined using a single SRv6 SID.

A new flavor for the SRv6 Network Programming behavior called micro-segment (uSID for short) is defined in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-spring-srv6-srh-compression/

The new flavor allowed the realization of SRv6 use-cases with much less MTU overhead. As a single SID can be used to carry more than one micro-instruction (i.e., micro-segment “uSID”)

SRv6 uSID is supported in SONiC (sonic-net/sonic-swss#2335) as part of release 202212 (~Dec 2022). This PR allows for the integration of FRR and SONiC.
We will send another PR for the FPM Module extensions required for the integration with SONiC.

This PR extends the bgpd and zebra daemons of FRR to add support for uSID.

We extended the SRv6 locator implementation to add support for a usid flag. When the usid flag is set, the bgpd will install SRv6 behaviors with the uSID in the dataplane and use the proper SRv6 Endpoint Behavior codepoint in the BGP advertisement.

The SRv6 uSID can be enabled in FRR using behavior usid CLI command as shown below

router(config)# segment-routing
router(config-sr)# srv6
router(config-srv6)# locators
router(config-srv6-locators)# locator LOC1
router(config-srv6-locator)# prefix fc00:0:1::/48 block-len 32 node-len 16 func-bits 16
router(config-srv6-locator)# behavior usid

In the PR we added the required vtysh command, topotest, and the documentation changes required for the usid behavior.

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta carmine.scarpitta@uniroma2.it

In this commit, we introduce the ability to specify flags for an SRv6
locator. Flags can be used to specify the properties of the locator.

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <carmine.scarpitta@uniroma2.it>
In this commit, we add support for a new flag called
`SRV6_LOCATOR_USID`. When the `SRV6_LOCATOR_USID` flag is set, the
routing protocols will install SRv6 behaviors with the uSID in the
dataplane.

This flag is used to specify a locator as a uSID locator. When a locator
is specified as a uSID locator, all the SRv6 SIDs allocated from the
locator by the routing protocols (like BGP) are bound to the SRv6 uSID
behaviors and use the SRv6 uSID codepoints in the BGP update message.

We extend the SRv6 locator implementation to add support for a `usid`
flag. When the `usid` flag is set, the bgpd will install SRv6 behaviors
with the uSID in the dataplane and use the proper SRv6 Endpoint Behavior
codepoint in the BGP advertisement.

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <carmine.scarpitta@uniroma2.it>
In this commit, we extend the ZAPI to support encoding and decoding the
locator flags contained in the messages exchanged between zebra and the
routing daemons.

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <carmine.scarpitta@uniroma2.it>
@frrbot frrbot bot added bgp documentation libfrr tests Topotests, make check, etc zebra labels Oct 29, 2022
@NetDEF-CI
Copy link
Collaborator

NetDEF-CI commented Oct 29, 2022

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

See below for issues.
CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8133/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.

Get source / Pull Request: Successful

Building Stage: Successful

Basic Tests: Failed

Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 4: Failed (click for details) Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 4: No useful log found
Successful on other platforms/tests
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 4
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 1
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 5
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 1
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 0
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 7
  • Fedora 29 rpm pkg check
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 0
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 9
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 5
  • CentOS 7 rpm pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 8
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 2
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 6
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 9
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 1
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 5
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 0
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 2
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 8
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 0
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 9
  • Ubuntu 18.04 deb pkg check
  • Ubuntu 20.04 deb pkg check
  • Debian 10 deb pkg check
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 1
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 4
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 4
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 9
  • Debian 9 deb pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 8
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 8
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 5
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 4
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 9
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 1
  • Static analyzer (clang)
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 5
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 0
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 8
  • Ubuntu 16.04 deb pkg check

@cscarpitta
Copy link
Contributor Author

ci:rerun

@cscarpitta cscarpitta changed the title Add support for SRv6 uSID Behaviors bgpd, zebra: Add support for SRv6 uSID Behaviors Oct 29, 2022
@NetDEF-CI
Copy link
Collaborator

NetDEF-CI commented Oct 29, 2022

Continuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFUL

Continuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFUL

Congratulations, this patch passed basic tests

Tested-by: NetDEF / OpenSourceRouting.org CI System

CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8134/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.

@riw777 riw777 self-requested a review November 1, 2022 15:17
@@ -245,6 +245,10 @@ json_object *srv6_locator_json(const struct srv6_locator *loc)
json_object_int_add(jo_root, "argumentBitsLength",
loc->argument_bits_length);

/* set true if the locator is a Micro-segment (uSID) locator */
if (CHECK_FLAG(loc->flags, SRV6_LOCATOR_USID))
json_object_string_add(jo_root, "behavior", "usid");
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I suggest telling explicitly for the operator what is the behavior used, instead of just usid.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Here the behavior defines the type of the locator which is usid. Based on the type of the locator, the other processes (e.g., bgpd) will use the proper behavior (e.g., uDT4 for L3VPNv4) and use the corresponding IANA codepoint.

lib/srv6.h Outdated
uint8_t flags;
};

enum srv6_endpoint_behavior_codepoint_t {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For enums, we usually do not add _t suffix. More like for typedefs.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changed srv6_endpoint_behavior_codepoint_t to srv6_endpoint_behavior_codepoint.
Thanks for the suggestion.

I also added a comment to remind us that these values are the codepoints defined by IANA.

DEFPY (locator_behavior,
locator_behavior_cmd,
"[no] behavior usid",
NO_STR
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems bad indentation.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Something went wrong with tabs and spaces :)
Fixed, thanks.


def check_srv6_locator(router, expected_file):
func = functools.partial(_check_srv6_locator, router, expected_file)
success, result = topotest.run_and_expect(func, None, count=5, wait=0.5)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we increase the waiting time a bit? Under high load, it might start failing...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changed to 3 seconds. Is it enough?

if (!client) {
zlog_warn(
"%s: Not found zclient(proto=%u, instance=%u).",
__func__, c->proto, c->instance);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please, drop __func__ here too.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Dropped, thanks.

In this commit, we introduce a new enumeration to encode the SRv6
Endpoint Behaviors codepoints defined in the IANA SRv6 Endpoint
Behaviors Registry
(https://www.iana.org/assignments/segment-routing/segment-routing.xhtml).

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <carmine.scarpitta@uniroma2.it>
Currently bgpd uses the opaque codepoint (0xFFFF) in the BGP
advertisement. In this commit, we update bgpd to use the SRv6 codepoints
defined in the IANA SRv6 Endpoint Behaviors Registry
(https://www.iana.org/assignments/segment-routing/segment-routing.xhtml)

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <carmine.scarpitta@uniroma2.it>
In this commit, we extend to print the `SRV6_LOCATOR_USID` flag.
The output appears as follows:

```
{
  "locators":[
    {
      "name":"loc1",
      "prefix":"fc00:0:1::/48",
      "blockBitsLength":32,
      "nodeBitsLength":16,
      "functionBitsLength":16,
      "argumentBitsLength":0,
      "uSID":true,
      "statusUp":true,
      "chunks":[
        {
          "prefix":"fc00:0:1::/48",
          "proto":"bgp"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}
```

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <carmine.scarpitta@uniroma2.it>
In this commit, we add two helper functions
`zebra_notify_srv6_locator_add` and `zebra_notify_srv6_locator_delete`.
These functions are used to notify locator additions/deletions to
zclients.

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <carmine.scarpitta@uniroma2.it>
Install a new command `behavior usid` into the `SRV6_LOC_NODE` CLI node.

This command allows the user to set/unset the `SRV6_LOCATOR_USID` flag
for an SRv6 locator. The `SRV6_LOCATOR_USID` flag indicates whether a
locator is a uSID locator or not. When the flag is set, the routing
daemons (e.g., bgpd) will install SRv6 behaviors with the uSID in the
dataplane.

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <carmine.scarpitta@uniroma2.it>
This test ensures that the command `behavior usid` works properly.

When the `behavior usid` command is set, a flag is added to the locator
to indicate that the locator is a uSID locator. This test verifies that
the locator works correctly when you set / unset the `behavior usid`
command.

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <carmine.scarpitta@uniroma2.it>
Add the documentation for the `behavior usid` command to zebra.

When the `behavior usid` command is set, a flag is added to the locator
to indicate that the locator is a uSID locator. When a locator is
specified as a uSID locator, the bgpd will install SRv6 behaviors with
the uSID in the dataplane and use the SRv6 uSID codepoints in the BGP
update message.

Signed-off-by: Carmine Scarpitta <carmine.scarpitta@uniroma2.it>
@cscarpitta cscarpitta force-pushed the feature/srv6-usid-behavior-support branch from 13daf1a to 439d4c9 Compare November 8, 2022 21:45
@NetDEF-CI
Copy link
Collaborator

NetDEF-CI commented Nov 8, 2022

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

See below for issues.
CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8279/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.

Get source / Pull Request: Successful

Building Stage: Failed

Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 build: Failed (click for details) Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 build: Unknown Log URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8279/artifact/U1804AMD64/frr.xref.xz/frr.xref.xz Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 build: Unknown Log URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8279/artifact/U1804AMD64/config.log/config.log.gz Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 build: config.status output from configure script can be found at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8279/artifact/U1804AMD64/config.status/config.status

DejaGNU Unittests (make check) failed for Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 build
see PyTest log at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8279/artifact/U1804AMD64/ErrorLog/log_pytests.txt

Successful on other platforms/tests
  • FreeBSD 12 amd64 build
  • NetBSD 9 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 18.04 i386 build
  • Ubuntu 18.04 arm7 build
  • Debian 11 amd64 build
  • Fedora 29 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 16.04 i386 build
  • Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 build
  • OpenBSD 7 amd64 build
  • Redhat 8 amd64 build
  • Debian 10 amd64 build
  • CentOS 7 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 16.04 arm7 build
  • Ubuntu 22.04 amd64 build
  • FreeBSD 11 amd64 build
  • Debian 9 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 16.04 arm8 build
  • Ubuntu 16.04 amd64 build
  • Redhat 9 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 20.04 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 18.04 ppc64le build

@cscarpitta
Copy link
Contributor Author

ci:rerun

@NetDEF-CI
Copy link
Collaborator

NetDEF-CI commented Nov 9, 2022

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

See below for issues.
CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8280/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.

Get source / Pull Request: Successful

Building Stage: Successful

Basic Tests: Failed

Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 7: Failed (click for details) Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 7: No useful log found
Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 9: Failed (click for details) Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 9: Unknown Log URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8280/artifact/TOPO9U18I386/ErrorLog/ Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 9: No useful log found
Successful on other platforms/tests
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 9
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 0
  • Ubuntu 16.04 deb pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 2
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 5
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 1
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 8
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 5
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 7
  • Fedora 29 rpm pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 8
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 5
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 3
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 0
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 8
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 4
  • CentOS 7 rpm pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 4
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 9
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 0
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 3
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 9
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 8
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 7
  • Static analyzer (clang)
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 0
  • Debian 9 deb pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 9
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 2
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 8
  • Debian 10 deb pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 5
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 6
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 1
  • Ubuntu 20.04 deb pkg check
  • Ubuntu 18.04 deb pkg check
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 5
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 6
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 1
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 1
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 4
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 0
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 4
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 3
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 1
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 4

@cscarpitta
Copy link
Contributor Author

ci:rerun

@NetDEF-CI
Copy link
Collaborator

NetDEF-CI commented Nov 9, 2022

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

See below for issues.
CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8283/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.

Get source / Pull Request: Successful

Building Stage: Failed

Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 build: Failed (click for details) Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 build: Unknown Log URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8283/artifact/U1804AMD64/frr.xref.xz/frr.xref.xz Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 build: Unknown Log URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8283/artifact/U1804AMD64/config.log/config.log.gz Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 build: config.status output from configure script can be found at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8283/artifact/U1804AMD64/config.status/config.status

DejaGNU Unittests (make check) failed for Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 build
see PyTest log at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8283/artifact/U1804AMD64/ErrorLog/log_pytests.txt

Successful on other platforms/tests
  • Debian 9 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 20.04 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 18.04 ppc64le build
  • Ubuntu 22.04 amd64 build
  • FreeBSD 12 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 18.04 arm7 build
  • Fedora 29 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 build
  • Debian 10 amd64 build
  • Redhat 9 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 16.04 arm7 build
  • FreeBSD 11 amd64 build
  • Debian 11 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 16.04 i386 build
  • Ubuntu 16.04 arm8 build
  • Ubuntu 16.04 amd64 build
  • Ubuntu 18.04 i386 build
  • OpenBSD 7 amd64 build
  • CentOS 7 amd64 build
  • Redhat 8 amd64 build
  • NetBSD 9 amd64 build

@cscarpitta
Copy link
Contributor Author

ci:rerun

@NetDEF-CI
Copy link
Collaborator

NetDEF-CI commented Nov 9, 2022

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

See below for issues.
CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8284/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.

Get source / Pull Request: Successful

Building Stage: Successful

Basic Tests: Failed

Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 8: Failed (click for details) Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 8: No useful log found
Successful on other platforms/tests
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 9
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 2
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 5
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 0
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 7
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 6
  • Ubuntu 16.04 deb pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 5
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 7
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 5
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 1
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 8
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 0
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 8
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 4
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 5
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 9
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 9
  • CentOS 7 rpm pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 4
  • Fedora 29 rpm pkg check
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 9
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 0
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 8
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 8
  • Static analyzer (clang)
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 9
  • Ubuntu 20.04 deb pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 0
  • Ubuntu 18.04 deb pkg check
  • Debian 10 deb pkg check
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 5
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 1
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 1
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 1
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 3
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 0
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 6
  • Debian 9 deb pkg check
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 4
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 1
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 4
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 3
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 4

@cscarpitta
Copy link
Contributor Author

ci:rerun failed

@NetDEF-CI
Copy link
Collaborator

NetDEF-CI commented Nov 9, 2022

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

Continuous Integration Result: FAILED

See below for issues.
CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8289/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.

Get source / Pull Request: Successful

Building Stage: Successful

Basic Tests: Failed

Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 7: Failed (click for details)

Topology Test Results are at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-TOPO7DEB10AMD64-8289/test

Topology Tests failed for Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 7
see full log at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8289/artifact/TOPO7DEB10AMD64/ErrorLog/log_topotests.txt

Successful on other platforms/tests
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 2
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 9
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 8
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 3
  • Ubuntu 16.04 deb pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 2
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 5
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 1
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 8
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 0
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 8
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 4
  • Debian 10 deb pkg check
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 9
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 5
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 0
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 7
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 4
  • CentOS 7 rpm pkg check
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 9
  • Fedora 29 rpm pkg check
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 8
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 2
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 9
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 9
  • Static analyzer (clang)
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 1
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 5
  • Ubuntu 18.04 deb pkg check
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 0
  • Ubuntu 20.04 deb pkg check
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 1
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 8
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 0
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 5
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 6
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 0
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 6
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 1
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 6
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 5
  • Debian 9 deb pkg check
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 1
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 3
  • Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 i386 part 4
  • Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 4
  • Addresssanitizer topotests part 4

@cscarpitta
Copy link
Contributor Author

ci:rerun

@NetDEF-CI
Copy link
Collaborator

Continuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFUL

Congratulations, this patch passed basic tests

Tested-by: NetDEF / OpenSourceRouting.org CI System

CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-8296/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.

@cscarpitta
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ton31337 Thank you for the review!
I addressed all the comments and force-pushed.

@ton31337 ton31337 merged commit 84f784f into FRRouting:master Nov 14, 2022
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.

3 participants