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

Minigraph parser changes for storage backend acl #11221

Merged

Conversation

neethajohn
Copy link
Contributor

@neethajohn neethajohn commented Jun 22, 2022

Signed-off-by: Neetha John nejo@microsoft.com

Why I did it

For storage backend, certain rules will be applied to the DATAACL table to allow only vlan tagged packets and drop untagged packets.

How I did it

Create DATAACL table if the device is a storage backend device
To avoid ACL resource issues, remove EVERFLOW related tables if the device is a storage backend device

How to verify it

Added the following unit tests

  • verify that EVERFLOW acl tables is removed and DATAACL table is added for storage backend tor
  • verify that no DATAACL tables are created and EVERFLOW tables exist for storage backend leaf

Which release branch to backport (provide reason below if selected)

  • 201811
  • 201911
  • 202006
  • 202012
  • 202106
  • 202111
  • 202205

Signed-off-by: Neetha John <nejo@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Neetha John <nejo@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Neetha John <nejo@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Neetha John <nejo@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Neetha John <nejo@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Neetha John <nejo@microsoft.com>
@neethajohn neethajohn force-pushed the backend_acl_minigraph_parser branch from 41e1a73 to 9fdbb6e Compare June 30, 2022 22:17
@neethajohn neethajohn merged commit 05ab004 into sonic-net:master Jul 6, 2022
@neethajohn neethajohn deleted the backend_acl_minigraph_parser branch July 6, 2022 17:27
yxieca pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 7, 2022
Signed-off-by: Neetha John nejo@microsoft.com

Why I did it
For storage backend, certain rules will be applied to the DATAACL table to allow only vlan tagged packets and drop untagged packets.

How I did it
Create DATAACL table if the device is a storage backend device
To avoid ACL resource issues, remove EVERFLOW related tables if the device is a storage backend device

How to verify it
Added the following unit tests
- verify that EVERFLOW acl tables is removed and DATAACL table is added for storage backend tor
- verify that no DATAACL tables are created and EVERFLOW tables exist for storage backend leaf
neethajohn added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2022
Signed-off-by: Neetha John <nejo@microsoft.com>

Backport #11221

Why I did it
For storage backend, certain rules will be applied to the DATAACL table to allow only vlan tagged packets and drop untagged packets.

How I did it
Create DATAACL table if the device is a storage backend device
To avoid ACL resource issues, remove EVERFLOW related tables if the device is a storage backend device

How to verify it
Added the following unit tests

verify that EVERFLOW acl tables is removed and DATAACL table is added for storage backend tor
verify that no DATAACL tables are created and EVERFLOW tables exist for storage backend leaf
skbarista pushed a commit to skbarista/sonic-buildimage that referenced this pull request Aug 17, 2022
Signed-off-by: Neetha John nejo@microsoft.com

Why I did it
For storage backend, certain rules will be applied to the DATAACL table to allow only vlan tagged packets and drop untagged packets.

How I did it
Create DATAACL table if the device is a storage backend device
To avoid ACL resource issues, remove EVERFLOW related tables if the device is a storage backend device

How to verify it
Added the following unit tests
- verify that EVERFLOW acl tables is removed and DATAACL table is added for storage backend tor
- verify that no DATAACL tables are created and EVERFLOW tables exist for storage backend leaf
richardyu-ms pushed a commit to richardyu-ms/sonic-buildimage that referenced this pull request Nov 25, 2022
…nal-202012

Solve merge conflicts in the profile buffers for 300m cable internal changes and the tests.

Related work items: sonic-net#2366, sonic-net#11221, sonic-net#11267, sonic-net#11369
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.

4 participants