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

NXOS: Manually Configurable Route-Target #52650

Open
wants to merge 12 commits into
base: devel
from

Conversation

@richardstrnad
Copy link

richardstrnad commented Feb 20, 2019

SUMMARY

Provides the option to manually add route-targets under an address family on Cisco Nexus (NXOS) Devices.

Fixes #41397

ISSUE TYPE
  • Feature Pull Request
COMPONENT NAME

nxos_vrf_af

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

richardstrnad added some commits Feb 20, 2019

@ansibot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

ansibot commented Feb 20, 2019

@richardstrnad, just so you are aware we have a dedicated Working Group for network.
You can find other people interested in this in #ansible-network on Freenode IRC
For more information about communities, meetings and agendas see https://github.com/ansible/community

click here for bot help

@trishnaguha trishnaguha self-assigned this Feb 21, 2019

@dagwieers dagwieers added the cisco label Feb 22, 2019

@richardstrnad richardstrnad changed the title [WIP] NXOS: Manually Configurable Route-Target NXOS: Manually Configurable Route-Target Feb 22, 2019

@richardstrnad richardstrnad marked this pull request as ready for review Feb 22, 2019

@ansibot ansibot added core_review and removed WIP labels Feb 22, 2019

afi: ipv4
route_target_both:
- rt: '65000:1000'
state: present

This comment has been minimized.

@mikewiebe

mikewiebe Feb 25, 2019

Contributor

How does the per route_target state work with the overall state property? For example what should I expect in the following case:

- nxos_vrf_af:
    state: absent
    vrf: ntc
    afi: ipv4
    route_target_export:
      - rt: '65000:1000'
        state: present

This comment has been minimized.

@richardstrnad

richardstrnad Feb 25, 2019

Author

Good point.

Route-targets exist under the address-family, therefore they can't exists without the address-family. In case of an absent address-family, the route-target part (same with route_target_both_auto_evpn) is ignored.

This comment has been minimized.

@mikewiebe

mikewiebe Feb 25, 2019

Contributor

@richardstrnad I suspected that was the desired workflow so thanks for confirming. Could you add a note in the doc header to clarify?

@trishnaguha trishnaguha requested a review from privateip Feb 26, 2019

@trishnaguha

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

trishnaguha commented Feb 26, 2019

richardstrnad added some commits Feb 26, 2019

Added a test to make sure that in case of `state=absent` on the vrf
level the route-target options are ignored.
@ansibot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

ansibot commented Feb 26, 2019

The test ansible-test sanity --test docs-build [explain] failed with 1 error:

docs/docsite/rst/modules/nxos_vrf_af_module.rst:358:0: warning: Inline interpreted text or phrase reference start-string without end-string.

click here for bot help

@ansibot ansibot added needs_revision and removed core_review labels Feb 26, 2019

@ansibot ansibot added core_review and removed needs_revision labels Feb 27, 2019

@trishnaguha trishnaguha requested review from Qalthos and ganeshrn Mar 7, 2019

@trishnaguha
Copy link
Member

trishnaguha left a comment

Instead of having three different params, we can have route_target: [{routes: '...', direction: '{import|export|both}', state: '...'}]?

@ansibot ansibot added the stale_ci label Mar 7, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.