-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.4k
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
Define SYSTEM_DEFAULTS
table to control tunnel_qos_remap
#10877
Define SYSTEM_DEFAULTS
table to control tunnel_qos_remap
#10877
Conversation
Signed-off-by: bingwang <wang.bing@microsoft.com>
/azp run Azure.sonic-buildimage |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
@@ -1714,7 +1765,14 @@ def get_tunnel_entries(tunnel_intfs, lo_intfs, hostname): | |||
for type, tunnel_dict in tunnel_intfs.items(): | |||
for tunnel_key, tunnel_attr in tunnel_dict.items(): | |||
tunnel_attr['dst_ip'] = lo_addr | |||
|
|||
if (tunnel_qos_remap.get('status') == 'enabled') and (mux_tunnel_name == tunnel_key) and (peer_switch_ip is not None): | |||
tunnel_attr['src_ip'] = peer_switch_ip |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since the minigraph is anyways changing, can we have the src_ip
to be coming from minigraph TunnelInterface
instead of having the logic to determine from peer_switch_ip
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was also thinking about that. The problem is, I'm afraid it's not easy to implement that logic in Metadata.
For example, for upper_tor, the peer_ip would be 10.1.0.33
, while for lower_tor
, it would be 10.1.0.32
. That means we have to generate different minigraph for upper_tor/lower_tor. I don't konw if it's doable. It may require a bunch of code change. So I put it in minigraph parser.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMO, this would be pretty simple to implement. And btw, the minigraph is indeed different for upper and lower tor. Approving this!
/azp run Azure.sonic-buildimage |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Signed-off-by: bingwang <wang.bing@microsoft.com>
/azp run Azure.sonic-buildimage |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Signed-off-by: bingwang <wang.bing@microsoft.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, thanks!
/azp run Azure.sonic-buildimage |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
…anch Related work items: #52, #71, #73, #75, #77, sonic-net#1306, sonic-net#1588, sonic-net#1991, sonic-net#2031, sonic-net#2040, sonic-net#2053, sonic-net#2066, sonic-net#2069, sonic-net#2087, sonic-net#2107, sonic-net#2110, sonic-net#2112, sonic-net#2113, sonic-net#2117, sonic-net#2124, sonic-net#2125, sonic-net#2126, sonic-net#2128, sonic-net#2130, sonic-net#2131, sonic-net#2132, sonic-net#2133, sonic-net#2134, sonic-net#2135, sonic-net#2136, sonic-net#2137, sonic-net#2138, sonic-net#2139, sonic-net#2140, sonic-net#2143, sonic-net#2158, sonic-net#2161, sonic-net#2233, sonic-net#2243, sonic-net#2250, sonic-net#2254, sonic-net#2260, sonic-net#2261, sonic-net#2267, sonic-net#2278, sonic-net#2282, sonic-net#2285, sonic-net#2288, sonic-net#2289, sonic-net#2292, sonic-net#2294, sonic-net#8887, sonic-net#9279, sonic-net#9390, sonic-net#9511, sonic-net#9700, sonic-net#10025, sonic-net#10322, sonic-net#10479, sonic-net#10484, sonic-net#10493, sonic-net#10500, sonic-net#10580, sonic-net#10595, sonic-net#10628, sonic-net#10634, sonic-net#10635, sonic-net#10644, sonic-net#10670, sonic-net#10691, sonic-net#10716, sonic-net#10731, sonic-net#10750, sonic-net#10751, sonic-net#10752, sonic-net#10761, sonic-net#10769, sonic-net#10775, sonic-net#10776, sonic-net#10779, sonic-net#10786, sonic-net#10792, sonic-net#10793, sonic-net#10800, sonic-net#10806, sonic-net#10826, sonic-net#10839, sonic-net#10840, sonic-net#10842, sonic-net#10844, sonic-net#10847, sonic-net#10849, sonic-net#10852, sonic-net#10865, sonic-net#10872, sonic-net#10877, sonic-net#10886, sonic-net#10889, sonic-net#10903, sonic-net#10904, sonic-net#10905, sonic-net#10913, sonic-net#10914, sonic-net#10916, sonic-net#10919, sonic-net#10925, sonic-net#10926, sonic-net#10929, sonic-net#10933, sonic-net#10934, sonic-net#10937, sonic-net#10941, sonic-net#10947, sonic-net#10952, sonic-net#10953, sonic-net#10957, sonic-net#10959, sonic-net#10971, sonic-net#10972, sonic-net#10980
Signed-off-by: bingwang wang.bing@microsoft.com
Why I did it
This PR is to define a new table
SYSTEM_DEFAULTS
to turn on/off new features in SONiC.Currently, only the flag to turn on/off
tunnel_qos_remap
is in the new table.HLD sonic-net/SONiC#982
How I did it
minigraph.xml
minigrapg.py
to parse the new section, and write intoconfig_db
.TunnelQosRemapEnabled=False
. Otherwiseminigraph.py
will try to parse new fields inminigraph.xml
, and write the parsed value intoconfig_db
.The extra values for tunnel qos remapping are as below.
Changes for the templates will be raised in another PR.
How to verify it
Verified by adding new UT cases.
Which release branch to backport (provide reason below if selected)
Description for the changelog
Define
SYSTEM_DEFAULTS
table to control tunnel_qos_remap.Link to config_db schema for YANG module changes
A picture of a cute animal (not mandatory but encouraged)