-
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
Prefix list count #4578
Prefix list count #4578
Conversation
When a prefix-list is applied to a BGP neighbor to deny the learning of specific routes, the hit count is showing 0 for BGP even though the routes are being filtered correctly due to the configured prefix-list. Before fix: c1# show ip prefix-list nag seq 10 ZEBRA: seq 10 permit any (hit count: 0, refcount: 0) BGP: seq 10 permit any (hit count: 0, refcount: 0) c1# show ip prefix-list nag seq 5 ZEBRA: seq 5 deny 1.0.1.0/24 (hit count: 0, refcount: 0) BGP: seq 5 deny 1.0.1.0/24 (hit count: 0, refcount: 0) Fix: Increment the prefix-list's hit count whenever a rule match occurs. After Fix: c1# show ip prefix-list nag seq 10 ZEBRA: seq 10 permit any (hit count: 0, refcount: 0) BGP: seq 10 permit any (hit count: 6, refcount: 0) c1# show ip prefix-list nag seq 5 ZEBRA: seq 5 deny 1.0.1.0/24 (hit count: 0, refcount: 0) BGP: seq 5 deny 1.0.1.0/24 (hit count: 1, refcount: 0) Signed-off-by: Visakha Erina visakha.erina@broadcom.com
The documentation was a tiny bit odd. Clean it up to be a bit better. Signed-off-by: Donald Sharp <sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com>
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.
Thanks for your contribution to FRR!
- One of your commits does not have a blank line between the summary and body; this will break
git log --oneline
If you are a new contributor to FRR, please see our contributing guidelines.
49c652f
to
a65a2f4
Compare
💚 Basic BGPD CI results: SUCCESS, 0 tests failedResults table
For details, please contact louberger |
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-FRRPULLREQ-8168/ This is a comment from an automated CI system. CLANG Static Analyzer Summary
No Changes in Static Analysis warnings compared to base1 Static Analyzer issues remaining.See details at |
@@ -165,14 +165,8 @@ Showing ip prefix-list | |||
Clear counter of ip prefix-list | |||
------------------------------- | |||
|
|||
.. index:: clear ip prefix-list | |||
.. clicmd:: clear ip prefix-list | |||
.. index:: clear ip prefix-list [NAME [A.B.C.D/M]] |
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.
shouldn't be WORD
?
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.
it's the documentation not the internal cli. I think NAME captures the better what we are looking for here.
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-FRRPULLREQ-8166/ This is a comment from an automated CI system. CLANG Static Analyzer Summary
No Changes in Static Analysis warnings compared to base1 Static Analyzer issues remaining.See details at |
Take code from 4558 and cleanup the 3 commits via a
git rebase
. Nothing else was done to the code