Rules without to-net field miss table parameter in ip cli
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
charm-advanced-routing |
Fix Released
|
High
|
Alvaro Uria |
Bug Description
Hi,
I tested this charm to pursue the effects of former policy routing charm,
where we used to set a couple of rules like the following:
from $my_net to $my_net lookup main priority 100
from $my_net lookup $my_net_table priority 101
Where $my_net_table contains a single route, a default via
for anything coming from a different net to be answered on
it.
The rules that goes to $my_net_table will be populated
like:
ip rule add from $my_net lookup $my_net_table priority 101
and the rule won't be visible in the ip rule s output. Executing
the command by hand will tell that table parameter is missing,
so executing he following will set the rule:
ip rule add from $my_net lookup table $my_net_table priority 101
Thanks!
Jose.
Related branches
- Canonical IS BootStack: Pending requested
-
Diff: 405 lines (+173/-96)6 files modifiedREADME.md (+5/-5)
example_config.yaml (+5/-8)
lib/routing_entry.py (+54/-34)
lib/routing_validator.py (+11/-5)
tests/functional/cfg_opts.py (+86/-0)
tests/functional/test_routing.py (+12/-44)
- Alvaro Uria (community): Disapprove
-
Diff: 72 lines (+18/-22)2 files modifiedlib/routing_entry.py (+4/-2)
lib/routing_validator.py (+14/-20)
Changed in charm-advanced-routing: | |
status: | Confirmed → In Progress |
Changed in charm-advanced-routing: | |
status: | Fix Committed → Fix Released |
In bug 1864800, it is also reported that the "main" (default) table is not allowed. That's true and will be also taken into account.