DM: lo0 address not pushed for v4 networks.

Bug #1696642 reported by Shashikiran H
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Juniper Openstack
Status tracked in Trunk
R3.2.3.x
Invalid
High
Shashikiran H
R4.0
Invalid
High
Shashikiran H
Trunk
Invalid
High
Shashikiran H

Bug Description

Version: 4.0.0.0-20

DM does not push lo0 address for v4 networks. v6 network works. lo0 gets ip for a dual stack V6 VN.

Only messages from DM logs:

06/08/2017 04:58:26 AM [contrail-device-manager]: Router 10.204.217.190:
06/08/2017 04:58:26 AM [contrail-device-manager]: UvePhysicalRouterConfigTrace: data = << name = yuvaraj ip_address = 10.204.217.190 connected_bgp_router = ce13e635-25f2-4263-90cf-bf4c6e4348fa product_info = juniper:mx auto_conf_enabled = True netconf_enabled_status = True last_commit_time = 2017-06-08 04:57:48 last_commit_duration = 37.9384040833 commit_status_message = failed to apply config, router response: total_commits_sent_since_up = 4 >>

Below config is for dual stack v6 nw:
interfaces {
    /* Interfaces Configuration */
    lo0 {
        /* L3 Gateway Interface, Virtual Network: test_v6, UUID: d4ac9419-b918-47f8-892c-4c25c4879d1f */
        unit 1006 {
            family inet {
                /* Allocated IPv4 Address from Subnet: 210.40.226.0/24 */
                address 210.40.226.3/32;
            }
            family inet6 {
                /* Allocated IPv6 Address from Subnet: 2001::101:0/120 */
                address 2001::101:3/128;
            }
        }
    }
}

This is the summary: I set global forwarding mode to L3. I extend 2 nws using DM: v4 only nw(1.1.1.0/24) and dual stack v6 nw(2001::101:0/120, 210.40.226.0/24).
I expect to see lo0 to have ips assigned from both these networks. v6 dual stack works as in the desciption and there is a lo0 address, however there is no lo0 ip from the v4 only network(1.1.1.0/24).

There is no v4 address for v4 nw here.

Jeba Paulaiyan (jebap)
tags: added: blocker
Revision history for this message
Suresh Balineni (sbalineni) wrote :

Hi Shashi,

I see both v4 and v6 addresses are pushed (per config you pasted), may be I didn't get the full context of the problem, can you please check and revert me back if there is any problem.

Thanks,
Suresh

Revision history for this message
Shashikiran H (skiranh) wrote :

Corrected the last line of the description.
This is the summary: I extend 2 nws using DM: v4 only nw(1.1.1.0/24) and dual stack v6 nw(2001::101:0/120, 210.40.226.0/24).
I expect to see lo0 to have ips assigned from both these networks. v6 dual stack works as in the desciption and there is a lo0 address, however there is no lo0 ip from the v4 only network(1.1.1.0/24).

description: updated
description: updated
Shashikiran H (skiranh)
description: updated
Revision history for this message
Suresh Balineni (sbalineni) wrote :

Shashi,

This does not look like a problem. Possibly, you would have got into this problem because of invalid configuration.

We configure lo0 interfaces only if computed VN's forwarding mode is 'L3'.

VN's Forwarding Mode = VN's Forwarding Mode (or) GlobalFowardingMode.

This means, DM considers global forwarding mode only if VN's forwarding mode is not set. BTW, WebUI by default sets VN's forwarding mode to 'L2_L3'.

See the following test results (and attached web UI screenshot):
--------------------------------

interfaces {
    /* Interfaces Configuration */
    lo0 {
        /* Router Loopback Interface */
        unit 0 {
            family inet {
                address 172.16.86.200/32 {
                    primary;
                    preferred;
                }
            }
        }
        /* L3 Gateway Interface, Virtual Network: vn-v6-l3, UUID: 726f3795-bb6a-4df2-9254-f32c001c7ab0 */
        unit 1019 {
            family inet6 {
                /* Allocated IPv6 Address from Subnet: cafe:beef:dead::/96 */
                address cafe:beef:dead::3/128;
            }
        }
        /* L3 Gateway Interface, Virtual Network: vn-l3, UUID: 4e39405a-9a41-49e3-a2e9-7c5a90cf3318 */
        unit 1017 {
            family inet {
                /* Allocated IPv4 Address from Subnet: 1.1.1.0/24 */
                address 1.1.1.3/32;
            }
        }
        /* L3 Gateway Interface, Virtual Network: vn-dual-l3, UUID: 0886f4fe-db8e-4d4e-b60d-c3425cec1fd3 */
        unit 1021 {
            family inet {
                /* Allocated IPv4 Address from Subnet: 3.3.3.0/24 */
                address 3.3.3.3/32;
            }
            family inet6 {
                /* Allocated IPv6 Address from Subnet: cafe:beef:deab::/96 */
                address cafe:beef:deab::3/128;
            }
        }
    }

Revision history for this message
Shashikiran H (skiranh) wrote :

Even explicitly setting the VN forwarding mode to L3 does not push the lo0 config to mx.
In my global settings case, I am not using webui for any configuration, so even that case should be supported if api calls dont set forwarding mode to L2_L3 by default.

This is a legacy regression case that was working till recently.

Revision history for this message
Suresh Balineni (sbalineni) wrote :

Ok, debugged the setup.

This is not an issue of lo0 ip allocation, even routing instance for the network is pushed.
Config is not pushed to MX even for any other updates.

Reason: We are hitting Physical Router Authentication Issue, possibly API server is not returning right password. There is another bug opened for the same issue.

06/27/2017 05:53:39 PM [contrail-device-manager]: Router 10.204.217.190: AuthenticationException('Authentication failed.',)
06/27/2017 05:53:39 PM [contrail-device-manager]: Router 10.204.217.190: AuthenticationException('Authentication failed.',)
06/27/2017 05:53:39 PM [contrail-device-manager]: UvePhysicalRouterConfigTrace: data = << name = yuvaraj ip_address = 10.204.217.190 connected_bgp_router = f41ff6f7-c2f5-4fab-ae21-fee08b236b9c product_info = juniper:mx auto_conf_enabled = True netconf_enabled_status = True last_commit_time = 2017-06-27 03:39:35 last_commit_duration = 28.3074820042 commit_status_message = failed to apply config, router response: AuthenticationException('Authentication failed.',) total_commits_sent_since_up = 2 >>
06/27/2017 05:54:00 PM [contrail-device-manager]: Router 10.204.217.190: AuthenticationException('Authentication failed.',)
06/27/2017 05:54:00 PM [contrail-device-manager]: Router 10.204.217.190: AuthenticationException('Authentication failed.',)
06/27/2017 05:54:00 PM [contrail-device-manager]: UvePhysicalRouterConfigTrace: data = << name = yuvaraj ip_address = 10.204.217.190 connected_bgp_router = f41ff6f7-c2f5-4fab-ae21-fee08b236b9c product_info = juniper:mx auto_conf_enabled = True netconf_enabled_status = True last_commit_time = 2017-06-27 03:39:35 last_commit_duration = 28.3074820042 commit_status_message = failed to apply config, router response: AuthenticationException('Authentication failed.',) total_commits_sent_since_up = 2 >>
^C

Revision history for this message
Suresh Balineni (sbalineni) wrote :

If you set PR's password again, then you see right config.

root@yuvaraj# show groups __contrail__ interfaces
/* Interfaces Configuration */
lo0 {
    /* L3 Gateway Interface, Virtual Network: new, UUID: 38bcc440-f524-4d2c-a47c-54ba34bc7eaf */
    unit 1043 {
        family inet {
            /* Allocated IPv4 Address from Subnet: 10.1.1.0/24 */
            address 10.1.1.3/32;
        }
    }

Please follow these bugs:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/juniperopenstack/+bug/1689740 (UI bug)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/juniperopenstack/r4.0/+bug/1659700 (API Server issue)

Revision history for this message
OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f) wrote : [Review update] R4.0

Review in progress for https://review.opencontrail.org/32740
Submitter: Shashikiran H (<email address hidden>)

Revision history for this message
Shashikiran H (skiranh) wrote :

Suresh mentioned the reason for the lack of address to be router external tag in the network which is not presently supported.

Revision history for this message
OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f) wrote :

Review in progress for https://review.opencontrail.org/32740
Submitter: Shashikiran H (<email address hidden>)

Revision history for this message
OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f) wrote :

Review in progress for https://review.opencontrail.org/34068
Submitter: Shashikiran H (<email address hidden>)

Revision history for this message
OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f) wrote : [Review update] master

Review in progress for https://review.opencontrail.org/34072
Submitter: Shashikiran H (<email address hidden>)

Revision history for this message
OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f) wrote : [Review update] R4.0

Review in progress for https://review.opencontrail.org/32740
Submitter: Shashikiran H (<email address hidden>)

Revision history for this message
OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f) wrote : A change has been merged

Reviewed: https://review.opencontrail.org/32740
Committed: http://github.com/Juniper/contrail-test/commit/bbf7367c862b8ec7ddc5a4c1746f717f79339869
Submitter: Zuul (<email address hidden>)
Branch: R4.0

commit bbf7367c862b8ec7ddc5a4c1746f717f79339869
Author: skiranh <email address hidden>
Date: Sat Jun 10 12:11:21 2017 +0530

Device manager output has changed. Names of group, policy are different
now. Changing the script.

Bug 1696642 says router external knob will make sure lo0
will not get ip from the VN with router external tag
Removing router external tag.
Change-Id: Ib75a39d9edc4c374a8a9157c893020d27ec32dbf

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.