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

pimd: When creating new upstream state, figure out what we should join #4177

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 23, 2019

Conversation

donaldsharp
Copy link
Member

Always when creating a new S,G state look at all possible ifchannels
to decide what the mroute should be.

The bug that this is fixing is this:

Suppose two incoming *,G joins on swp1, and swp2.
Now suppose that one of those ifchannel *,G sends a *,G S,G RPT Prune.
We were creating the S,G upstream state as we should but we were
only looking at the S,G ifchannel to decide the S,G mroute we would
be creating. As such what we need to do is to look over the associated
*,G ifchannels and allow us to associate correct oil needed.

Ticket: CM-24732
Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com

Always when creating a new S,G state look at all possible ifchannels
to decide what the mroute should be.

The bug that this is fixing is this:

Suppose two incoming `*,G` joins on swp1, and swp2.
Now suppose that one of those ifchannel `*,G` sends a `*,G S,G RPT Prune`.
We were creating the S,G upstream state as we should but we were
only looking at the S,G ifchannel to decide the S,G mroute we would
be creating.  As such what we need to do is to look over the associated
*,G ifchannels and allow us to associate correct oil needed.

Ticket: CM-24732
Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp <sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com>
@polychaeta polychaeta added the pim label Apr 23, 2019
@LabN-CI
Copy link
Collaborator

LabN-CI commented Apr 23, 2019

💚 Basic BGPD CI results: SUCCESS, 0 tests failed

Results table
_ _
Result SUCCESS git merge/4177 b077f57
Date 04/22/2019
Start 21:05:18
Finish 21:29:06
Run-Time 23:48
Total 1813
Pass 1813
Fail 0
Valgrind-Errors 0
Valgrind-Loss 0
Details vncregress-2019-04-22-21:05:18.txt
Log autoscript-2019-04-22-21:06:04.log.bz2
Memory 444 445 374

For details, please contact louberger

@NetDEF-CI
Copy link
Collaborator

Continuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFUL

Congratulations, this patch passed basic tests

Tested-by: NetDEF / OpenSourceRouting.org CI System

CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-7326/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.


CLANG Static Analyzer Summary

  • Github Pull Request 4177, comparing to Git base SHA f799ea3

No Changes in Static Analysis warnings compared to base

12 Static Analyzer issues remaining.

See details at
https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-7326/artifact/shared/static_analysis/index.html

@donaldsharp donaldsharp requested a review from Jafaral April 23, 2019 16:07
@Jafaral Jafaral merged commit 736d1bf into FRRouting:master Apr 23, 2019
@donaldsharp donaldsharp deleted the pim_more_sg branch April 30, 2019 12:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants