-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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
enable to transition to SEGMENT_ROUTING_NODE
when pathd is disabled
#10350
enable to transition to SEGMENT_ROUTING_NODE
when pathd is disabled
#10350
Conversation
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: SuccessfulBasic Tests: FailedDebian 9 deb pkg check: Failed (click for details)Debian 9 deb pkg check: No useful log foundTopotests debian 10 amd64 part 9: Failed (click for details)Topology Test Results are at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-TOPO9DEB10AMD64-2726/test Topology Tests failed for Topotests debian 10 amd64 part 9 Ubuntu 20.04 deb pkg check: Failed (click for details)Ubuntu 20.04 deb pkg check: No useful log foundSuccessful on other platforms/tests
|
ci:rerun |
1 similar comment
ci:rerun |
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: FailedUbuntu 16.04 amd64 build: Failed (click for details)Ubuntu 16.04 amd64 build: No useful log foundSuccessful on other platforms/tests
|
ci:rerun |
Continuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFULContinuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFULCongratulations, this patch passed basic tests Tested-by: NetDEF / OpenSourceRouting.org CI System CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-2729/ This is a comment from an automated CI system. |
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.
The change is right, just one request to comply with the common style.
@Mergifyio backport stable/8.1 |
🟠 Waiting for conditions to match
|
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: SuccessfulBasic Tests: FailedUbuntu 16.04 deb pkg check: Failed (click for details)Ubuntu 16.04 deb pkg check: No useful log foundSuccessful on other platforms/tests
|
…pathd` Signed-off-by: Yamato Sugawara <yamato.sugawara@linecorp.com>
a120c63
to
1b3aea9
Compare
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: FailedFreeBSD 11 amd64 build: Failed (click for details)FreeBSD 11 amd64 build: No useful log foundSuccessful on other platforms/tests
|
ci:rerun |
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: FailedUbuntu 16.04 i386 build: Failed (click for details)Ubuntu 16.04 i386 build: No useful log foundSuccessful on other platforms/tests
|
ci:rerun |
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: SuccessfulBasic Tests: FailedCentOS 7 rpm pkg check: Failed (click for details)CentOS 7 rpm pkg check: No useful log foundDebian 9 deb pkg check: Failed (click for details)Debian 9 deb pkg check: No useful log foundUbuntu 16.04 deb pkg check: Failed (click for details)Ubuntu 16.04 deb pkg check: No useful log foundUbuntu 20.04 deb pkg check: Failed (click for details)Ubuntu 20.04 deb pkg check: No useful log foundDebian 10 deb pkg check: Failed (click for details)Debian 10 deb pkg check: No useful log foundSuccessful on other platforms/tests
|
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: SuccessfulBasic Tests: FailedUbuntu 20.04 deb pkg check: Failed (click for details)Ubuntu 20.04 deb pkg check: No useful log foundSuccessful on other platforms/tests
|
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: SuccessfulBasic Tests: FailedUbuntu 18.04 deb pkg check: Failed (click for details)Ubuntu 18.04 deb pkg check: No useful log foundSuccessful on other platforms/tests
|
ci:rerun |
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: FailedUbuntu 18.04 i386 build: Failed (click for details)Ubuntu 18.04 i386 build: No useful log foundSuccessful on other platforms/tests
|
ci:rerun |
Continuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFULCongratulations, this patch passed basic tests Tested-by: NetDEF / OpenSourceRouting.org CI System CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-PULLREQ2-2747/ This is a comment from an automated CI system. |
@idryzhov CI passed! thanks to retry many times and give an approval! |
✅ Backports have been created
|
enable to transition to `SEGMENT_ROUTING_NODE` when pathd is disabled (backport #10350)
Currently
segment_routing_cmd
is not installed but defined when FRR configured with--disable-pathd
.but
SEGMENT_ROUTING_NODE
is used Zebra SRv6 Manager too.so this patch enables
SEGMENT_ROUTING_NODE
when FRR configured with--disable-pathd
.In Cisco's CLI,
SRV6_NODE
is directly installed onCONFIG_NODE
.I'll contribute to make SRv6 Manager to follow Cisco's CLI as another PR after this PR will be merged.
reference: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/asr9000/software/asr9k-r7-3/segment-routing/configuration/guide/b-segment-routing-cg-asr9000-73x/m-configure-srv6-usid.html?referring_site=RE&pos=1&page=https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/asr9000/software/asr9k-r6-6/segment-routing/configuration/guide/b-segment-routing-cg-asr9000-66x/b-segment-routing-cg-asr9000-66x_chapter_011.html
AS-IS
if I configure FRR with
--disable-pathd
, srv6_locator topotest fails.TO-BE
srv6_locator topotest will pass when FRR is configured with
--disable-pathd
.Signed-off-by: Yamato Sugawara yamato.sugawara@linecorp.com