Martin,

I did not have the chance to look at v6. Could you have a look whether the 
attached patch
fixes the behaviour?
Thanks

Michael

Attachment: 0002-OSPF-3-fix-for-fast-OSPF-convergence.patch
Description: Binary data



> On 29 Sep 2015, at 13:23, Martin Winter <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Found the bad commit. This is the source of at least 3 of the OSPFv3 failures
> (I have not verified it for all to save time)
> 
> 
> commit 2ef762ed9b88e5745012c5829f8f526c95443ddf
> Author: Michael Rossberg <[email protected]>
> Date:   Mon Jul 27 07:56:25 2015 +0200
> 
>    ospfd: Fast OSPF convergence
> 
>    When considering small networks that have extreme requirements on
>    availability and thus convergence delay, the timers given in the OSPF RFC
>    seem a little “conservative”, i.e., the delay between accepted LSAs and the
>    rate at which LSAs are sent.  Cisco introduced two commands 'timers 
> throttle
>    lsa all’ and 'timers lsa arrival’, which allow operators to tune these
>    parameters.
> 
>    I have been writing a patch to also support 'timers lsa arrival’ fully and
>    ‘timers throttle lsa all’ (without the throttling part) also in quagga.
> 
> 
> Not sure how this affects OSPFv3. (Maybe lib/libospf.h is used by OSPFv3 as 
> well?)
> 
> I’ve added one of the failing tests (ANVL-OSPFV3-8.9) to the limited set which
> I run on every commit and restarted the test for proposed and accepted branch.
> (see https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/QUAGGA-QMASTER2/latest for results on
> accepted/3 branch)
> 
> - Martin Winter
>  [email protected]
> 
> 
> 
> On 27 Sep 2015, at 3:34, Martin Winter wrote:
> 
>> Full compliance run is done for the accepted patches @ commit d3ac733
>> 
>> Most of it looks the same as the last release.
>> With the exception of OSPFv3, approx 4 results have changed:
>>      - new ISIS Ipv6 failures: ISISV6-26.2 & ISISV6-28.3
>>      - OSPF-12.4 now unpredictable (inconsistent results, was good before)
>>      - OSPF-24.6 now fixed.
>> I’ll analyze them on monday to make sure they are real issues.
>> 
>> OSPF IPv6 on the other side looks much worse.
>> Comparing to Git master @ 6064613 (2015-08-04), we have approx 20 new
>> failures. (and I have not yet looked at the specifics either)
>> 
>> Here is a quick list of the tests which now fail:
>> 
>>                        Quagga     Git Master   Git Master   Git Master  Git 
>> Accepted
>>                        0.99.24                                            
>> Round-3
>>                        f191f1e     f1fc327      55cfa2f      6064613      
>> d3ac733
>>                      2015-03-02   2015-05-14   2015-06-03   2015-08-04   
>> 2015-09-24
>> 
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-8.9    MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-16.5   MUST   UNPREDICT      pass      UNPREDICT       pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-16.14  MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-16.15  MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-16.16  MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-17.1   MUST   UNPREDICT      pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-18.1   MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-18.23  MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-20.1   MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-24.1   MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-25.3   MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-25.4   MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-26.5   MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-26.10  MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-28.6   MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-41.2   MUST   UNPREDICT    UNPREDICT      pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-43.6   MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-43.7   MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-43.8   MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> ANVL-OSPFV3-43.9   MUST     pass         pass         pass         pass      
>>   FAILED
>> 
>> For details (and some basic test description), see PDF on
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9on53yIVRYVNnQzY3lBbGI1WEU/view?usp=sharing
>> 
>> I’ll do some git bisect on monday and look into the details, but if someone 
>> wants to
>> guess which commits in the accepted branch may break OSPFv3, then please let 
>> me know.
>> 
>> - Martin Winter
>> [email protected]
>> 
>> 
>> On 26 Sep 2015, at 1:31, Martin Winter wrote:
>> 
>>> I’ve noticed that Paul (I assume) started a branch for accepted and 
>>> rejected patches.
>>> 
>>> I’ve added the branch with the accepted commits to the CI system
>>> 
>>> https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/QUAGGA-QMASTER and then select the branch 
>>> next to title.
>>> You should see the “volatile-patch-tracking-3-accepted” branch there.
>>> 
>>> Whenever a new commit is pushed, it should get kicked off automatically. 
>>> (But with some delay
>>> as our git mirror only syncs up to savannah every hour).
>>> 
>>> At the current time (at commit d3ac733) it passes the build and the basic 
>>> compliance tests.
>>> 
>>> Disclaimer: the —enable-werror is NOT yet pushed and not specifically 
>>> selected in my build,
>>> so warnings won’t fail the build at this time.
>>> 
>>> As it currently passes the basic checks, I’ve kicked off a full RFC 
>>> compliance run for it.
>>> I will have the results by Sunday evening latest.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Martin Winter
>>> [email protected]

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

_______________________________________________
Quagga-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev

Reply via email to