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

tests: bfd_vrf_ospf_unnumbered #15048

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

lynnemorrison
Copy link
Contributor

Add test that runs dynamic BFD sessions in a VRF over OSPF
unnumbered interfaces. OSPF metrics are different on each
interface to make sure BFD packets are sent on the correct
interface.

This test currently fails as there appears to be a bug in OSPF not
setting interface option with dynamic BFD.

Add test that runs dynamic BFD sessions in a VRF over OSPF
unnumbered interfaces.   OSPF metric is different on each
interface to make sure BFD packets are sent on the correct
interface.

This test currently fails as there appears to be a bug in
OSPF not setting interface option with dynamic BFD.

Signed-off-by: Lynne Morrison <[email protected]>
@frrbot frrbot bot added the tests Topotests, make check, etc label Dec 20, 2023
[
{
"multihop":false,
"peer":"2.2.2.2",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please use https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5737.html ranges or private ranges for topotests.

},
{
"multihop":false,
"peer":"3.3.3.3",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ditto.

!
hostname r1
password zebra
log file /tmp/r1-frr.log
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not needed.

log file /tmp/r1-frr.log
!
interface Test
ip address 1.1.1.1/32
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ditto.

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
VRF Name: Test
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can't we use JSON output?


# Required to instantiate the topology builder class.

pytestmark = [pytest.mark.ospfd, pytest.mark.bgpd]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't see bgpd at all.



def setup_module(mod):
logger.info("OSPF Multi VRF Topology with BGP route leaking:\n {}".format(TOPOLOGY))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wrong info.

router.load_frr_config(os.path.join(CWD, "{}/frr.conf".format(rname)))

router.load_config(
TopoRouter.RD_BFD, os.path.join(CWD, "{}/bfdd.conf".format(rname))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can't we just bundle this with frr.conf?


# Initialize all routers.
tgen.start_router()
for router in router_list.values():
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This check is not needed.

tgen = get_topogen()

if tgen.routers_have_failure():
pytest.skip("skipped because of router(s) failure")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we want to skip or raise an error on failures?

@donaldsharp
Copy link
Member

Closing per authors request

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
master size/XL tests Topotests, make check, etc
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants