CheckPoint: cluster member policy inheritance

[sfraint]

For cluster members, apply the policy from the cluster.

[batfish-bot]

This change is 

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #7653 (7bbd4f3) into master (9cd68df) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 88.88%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #7653      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     73.71%   73.70%   -0.01%     
+ Complexity    41552    41547       -5     
============================================
  Files          3264     3264              
  Lines        163796   163800       +4     
  Branches      19669    19669              
============================================
- Hits         120738   120733       -5     
- Misses        33621    33625       +4     
- Partials       9437     9442       +5     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...representation/CheckPointGatewayConfiguration.java	89.43% <88.88%> (+0.10%)	⬆️
...src/main/java/org/batfish/coordinator/PoolMgr.java	54.76% <0.00%> (-4.77%)	⬇️
...fish/bddreachability/BDDLoopDetectionAnalysis.java	80.23% <0.00%> (-2.33%)	⬇️
...bddreachability/BDDReachabilityGraphOptimizer.java	82.82% <0.00%> (-1.02%)	⬇️
...ain/java/org/batfish/coordinator/WorkQueueMgr.java	70.93% <0.00%> (-0.59%)	⬇️
...rg/batfish/dataplane/ibdp/EigrpRoutingProcess.java	89.08% <0.00%> (-0.36%)	⬇️
...src/main/java/org/batfish/coordinator/WorkMgr.java	75.44% <0.00%> (-0.31%)	⬇️
...ain/java/org/batfish/storage/FileBasedStorage.java	86.06% <0.00%> (+0.61%)	⬆️
...ava/org/batfish/datamodel/bgp/Layer2VniConfig.java	82.00% <0.00%> (+2.00%)	⬆️

[corinaminer]

Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @arifogel and @sfraint)

---

projects/batfish/src/main/java/org/batfish/vendor/check_point_gateway/representation/CheckPointGatewayConfiguration.java, line 641 at r2 (raw file):

        cluster.isPresent()
            ? cluster.get().getPolicy().getAccessPolicyName()
            : gateway.getPolicy().getAccessPolicyName();

did we determine that the cluster member can't have a policy configured? or have we just not seen that?

If the latter, I think we should at least check and warn if a policy is configured on the cluster member

[sfraint]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @arifogel and @corinaminer)

---

projects/batfish/src/main/java/org/batfish/vendor/check_point_gateway/representation/CheckPointGatewayConfiguration.java, line 641 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, corinaminer (Corina Miner) wrote…

did we determine that the cluster member can't have a policy configured? or have we just not seen that?

If the latter, I think we should at least check and warn if a policy is configured on the cluster member

It sounds like the policy should be defined on the cluster object. So, the members should never have policies directly attached.

[corinaminer]

Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @arifogel)

---

projects/batfish/src/main/java/org/batfish/vendor/check_point_gateway/representation/CheckPointGatewayConfiguration.java, line 641 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, sfraint (Spencer Fraint) wrote…

It sounds like the policy should be defined on the cluster object. So, the members should never have policies directly attached.

ok, easy enough to change later if we were to out differently

[corinaminer]

Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @arifogel)

---

projects/batfish/src/main/java/org/batfish/vendor/check_point_gateway/representation/CheckPointGatewayConfiguration.java, line 641 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, corinaminer (Corina Miner) wrote…

ok, easy enough to change later if we were to out differently

*find out