https://jira.opendaylight.org This file is an XML representation of an issue en-us 8.20.10 820010 22-06-2022 https://jira.opendaylight.org/browse/NETVIRT-900 netvirt <p>Description: </p> <p>FIB entries not showing all IP's with dual stack VM IP's <br/> Steps:</p> <p> 1.Create, Network, Subnet(IPV4), Subnet(SLAAC), boot VM's check check all IP address got assigned.<br/> status: Pass</p> <p> 2. Create network and add subnet to it and check FIB entries.</p> <p> Status: FAIL. FIB entries are missing.</p> <p>Operating System: All<br/> Platform: All</p> NETVIRT-900

FIB entries not showing all IP's with dualstack VM IP's

Bug Verified Unresolved Philippe Guibert RajaRajan Manickam Mon, 11 Sep 2017 09:34:08 +0000 Thu, 3 May 2018 15:50:45 +0000 Nitrogen General 0 4 <p>Attachment logs.tar.gz has been added with description: Logs attached</p> <p>This issue was reverified in RC3 build and the problem did not appear.</p> <p>Rajarjan please attach your comments to the bug and then move the bug state appropriately.</p> <p>(In reply to Vivekanandan Narasimhan from comment #1)<br/> &gt; This issue was reverified in RC3 build and the problem did not appear.<br/> &gt; <br/> &gt; Rajarjan please attach your comments to the bug and then move the bug state<br/> &gt; appropriately.</p> <p>I have reduced priority from blocker. Since, issues is fixed on RC3 build.</p> <p>Will update the same once the issue is fixed with dual stack VM.</p> <p>Hi Rajarajan,</p> <p>I understood that the problem seems to be fixed in RC3.<br/> As the initial problem has been seen with older version ( RC2 ?), do we conclude that this issue is on hold ?</p> <p>(In reply to Philippe Guibert from comment #3)<br/> &gt; Hi Rajarajan,<br/> &gt; <br/> &gt; I understood that the problem seems to be fixed in RC3.<br/> &gt; As the initial problem has been seen with older version ( RC2 ?), do we<br/> &gt; conclude that this issue is on hold ?</p> <p>Hi Philippe,</p> <p> This issue is reproducible on both RC3 and RC3.1. </p> <p> This will be blocker for further testing.Since, when i associate subnet to router, i am expecting table 21 should be programmed. But, few VM IP's programmed and many of them not getting programmed.</p> <p> Due to this data path will not work. Shall i move it blocker from critical?</p> <p>Thanks,<br/> RajaRajan</p> <p>Hi rajarajan,</p> <p>It seems this test is not visible on CSIT.<br/> Right ?</p> <p>Can I have more informationon the setup you used:</p> <ul class="alternate" type="square"> <li>how many VMs are booted ( how many minimum VMs could be used to reproduce the issue)</li> <li>when you say create network, you create a new network and anew subnet attached to the router ; right ?</li> </ul> <p>Hi Philippe,</p> <p> Yes. This test case is not part of CSIT yet.</p> <ul class="alternate" type="square"> <li>how many VMs are booted ( how many minimum VMs could be used to reproduce the issue)</li> </ul> <p> Answer: It can be reproducible easily with only 4 VM's.</p> <ul class="alternate" type="square"> <li>when you say create network, you create a new network and anew subnet attached to the router ; right ?</li> </ul> <p> Answer: Yes. Create new network and subnet and attached to router.</p> <p> Please let me know if any info required. </p> <p>Thanks,<br/> RajaRajan</p> <p>it is not very clear the steps posted by Rajarajan.</p> <p>If the following steps works for on top-of-trunk of Nitrogen (not IPv6 review based workspaces), then we can actually close the bug:</p> <p>1. Create a Network - N1</p> <p>2. Create an IPv4 subnet on that network - V4N1</p> <p>3. Create a Ipv6 subnet on that network - V6N1</p> <p>4. Create a Router R1 and add only the IPv6 subnet to that router</p> <p>5. Make sure the DHCP Agent running is capable of supporting both IPv4 and IPv6 (like upstream CSIT)</p> <p>5. Then boot 4 VMs on the Network (not the subnet). All those VMs will come up as DualStack VMs.</p> <p>6. Make sure all the 4 VMs got both the IPv4 and IPv6 addresses correctly.</p> <p>7. Make sure FIB shows only the IPv6 address prefixes of V6N1 subnet.</p> <p>8. Just make sure that IPv6 to IPv6 communication between all the 4 VMs are working.</p> <p>9. Just make that IPv4 to IPv4 communication between all the 4 VMs are working.</p> <p>10. Create another new network N2 and an IPv4 subnet V4N2 on that new network.</p> <p>11. Boot 2 more VMs with network N2.</p> <p>11. Add that subnet V4N2 to the same router R1 of Step 4.</p> <p>10. Make sure FIB now additionally shows the two IPv4 VM prefixes of V4N2 subnet.</p> <p>11. Make sure that both those VMs of step 11 are able to communicate with each other on IPv4 prefixes.</p> <p>12. Make sure that both those VMs of N2 of Step 11 are not able to communicate over IPv4 to the VMs on Network N1.</p> <p>13. Now delete subnet V6N1 from Router R1.</p> <p>14. Make sure all IPv6 FIB Entries of V6N1 disappear. </p> <p>15. Then delete subnet V4N2 from Router R1.</p> <p>16. Make sure all the IPv4 FIB Entries of V4N2 disappear.</p> <p>17. Delete the Router R1. Make sure VRF Table for R1 disappears.</p> <p>&lt;Test Ends&gt;</p> <p>Hi,<br/> I did some basic testing with head branch of nitrogen.</p> <ul> <li>13aa5277638c - (HEAD, gerrit/stable/nitrogen) BUG 9221: Improve logical SFF handling (3 days ago) &lt;Jaime Caamaño</li> <li>87fa9a02ee34 - BUG 9220: don't use tun_gpe_np as match field (3 days ago) &lt;Jaime Caamaño Ruiz&gt;</li> </ul> <p>Please see log file <a href="https://jira.opendaylight.org/secure/attachment/14194/ticket_9138_traceopenstack_odl.txt" class="external-link" rel="nofollow">https://jira.opendaylight.org/secure/attachment/14194/ticket_9138_traceopenstack_odl.txt</a>.</p> <p>According to above plan, I could observe the following:</p> <ul class="alternate" type="square"> <li>at step 7, even if ipv4 subnet is not attached to router, the IPv4s are displayed in the FIB, along with IPv6.</li> <li>reversely at step 14, the ipv4 IPs of the first N1 network have been removed, when IPv6 subnet is detached.</li> </ul> <p>Note also, that the plan differs in two points:</p> <ul class="alternate" type="square"> <li>I did create only 3 and 1 VM for respectively N1 and N2.</li> <li>for N2, I created the VM after having attached the ipv4 subnet of N2 to router1.<br/> Hope it does not impact the test result.</li> </ul> <p>file <a href="https://jira.opendaylight.org/secure/attachment/14195/ticket_9138_traceopenstack_odl_test2.txt" class="external-link" rel="nofollow">https://jira.opendaylight.org/secure/attachment/14195/ticket_9138_traceopenstack_odl_test2.txt</a> follows an other series of steps.<br/> I followed the series, and did not detect any missing FIB entries,.., except at step 9, where almost all IPv6 entries are missing ( indeed, only gateway IPv6 was still present)</p> <p>Adding to this, in file <a href="https://jira.opendaylight.org/secure/attachment/14196/ticket_9138_traceopenstack_odl_test3_binary_karaf7.txt" class="external-link" rel="nofollow">https://jira.opendaylight.org/secure/attachment/14196/ticket_9138_traceopenstack_odl_test3_binary_karaf7.txt</a>, using following file:<br/> <a href="https://nexus.opendaylight.org/content/repositories/public/org/opendaylight/integration/karaf/0.7.0/karaf-0.7.0.tar.gz" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">https://nexus.opendaylight.org/content/repositories/public/org/opendaylight/integration/karaf/0.7.0/karaf-0.7.0.tar.gz</a> <br/> date: Tue Sep 19 21:06:55 </p> <p> I could observe some missing entries</p> <p>I ran 2 VMs with IPv4 Subnet ( VM1, VM2), then I ran 2 other VMs with IPv6 being added ( VM3, VM4).<br/> I could see following differences:</p> <p>At step 4, original VMs take more or less time to acquire IPv6 address ( VM2 takes more time than VM1)<br/> At step 7, there is a missing IPv4 and IPv6 entry ( this is VM2 addressing that is missing)</p> <p>As for before, the step 9 is flushing almost all IPv6.</p> <p>Regards,</p> <p>2 issues encountered:</p> <ul class="alternate" type="square"> <li>issue 1 : some IPv6 entries not present<br/> seen only on karaf-0.7 <br/> this is this issue.<br/> And As a test has been done with latest netvirt nitrogen, I can say that the issue is not reproduced anymore.</li> </ul> <ul class="alternate" type="square"> <li>issue 2 : when dissociate ipv4 subnet, the ipv6 entries are removed too<br/> this should be part of a separate ticket.</li> </ul> <p>Issue is FIXED in latest stable RC build.<br/> closing the issue.</p> Relates NETVIRT-964 Development External issue ID 9138 External issue URL Issue Type Priority Rank 0|i01unj: