Fix some missing structure references #412
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dhalperi
force-pushed
the
reference-some-structures
branch
from
d7347c4
to
24f8364
Compare
|
Note that referencing the NAT pool and ACL here does not actually have any affect, because we handle their references completely differently: https://github.com/batfish/batfish/blob/master/projects/batfish/src/main/java/org/batfish/representation/cisco/CiscoConfiguration.java#L1974 I can't quite understand when we use which method. |
There are two SNAT rules, one with a defined ACL one with an undefined ACL. The defined ACL is marked as used, and the undefined ACL is marked as undefined.
dhalperi
force-pushed
the
reference-some-structures
branch
from
2f51148
to
342e0c4
Compare
arifogel
approved these changes
Sep 7, 2017
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Questions:
When do we use CiscoStructureType.IPV4_ACCESS_LIST vs IP_ACCESS_LIST? It looks like CiscoStructureType.IP_ACCESS_LIST_EXTENDED is never used, nor is CiscoStructureType.IP_ACCESS_LIST_STANDARD.
(aka, should these be registered as IPV4 or IP)
What determines which types of structures we "mark references to IPv4/6 ACLs that may not appear in data model". Why do we not mark all references, regardless of whether they appear in the data model? Only mildly redundant work.