[3.0-2710~kilo]No Route-leaking seen after one of the SVMs forming a Port-tuple in a chain is deleted

[Ganesha HV]

Setup
=====
nodeg25, g26 & g27 - cfgm
nodeg26 & g27 - ctrl
nodeg25 - webUI/horizon
nodek8, k9 & k10 - compute

Steps
=====
1]. Created two networks, l-vn(10.10.10.0/24) and r-vn(20.20.20.0/24)
2]. Launched l-vm, r-vm and svm1 and svm2 using Nova:

root@nodeg25:~# neutron port-list
+--------------------------------------+------------+-------------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| id | name | mac_address | fixed_ips |
+--------------------------------------+------------+-------------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 9fb53065-4010-4113-bff0-95a74b27debd | svm1-right | 02:9f:b5:30:65:40 | {"subnet_id": "5d40b4ea-b6a5-4f3d-9128-4b3f336c627e", "ip_address": "20.20.20.4"} |
| 43efa049-414c-492c-b7c5-4362866b06c1 | r-vm | 02:43:ef:a0:49:41 | {"subnet_id": "5d40b4ea-b6a5-4f3d-9128-4b3f336c627e", "ip_address": "20.20.20.3"} |
| fbbc8ebc-54ff-49bc-8d24-cd27e58b96a8 | svm1-mgmt | 02:fb:bc:8e:bc:54 | {"subnet_id": "79afc189-f1e7-4476-af96-e22fa39f7230", "ip_address": "192.168.1.3"} |
| a5b12f4e-11e1-44fa-aec2-5b20ad790562 | l-vm | 02:a5:b1:2f:4e:11 | {"subnet_id": "723071a7-fc5c-4586-9e91-96af03053a0e", "ip_address": "10.10.10.3"} |
| a0aebe29-506c-4628-931d-8cf4219b9d51 | svm2-left | 02:a0:ae:be:29:50 | {"subnet_id": "723071a7-fc5c-4586-9e91-96af03053a0e", "ip_address": "10.10.10.5"} |
| eb86e190-2c6b-41f0-a365-5ecb91cd31e8 | svm2-right | 02:eb:86:e1:90:2c | {"subnet_id": "5d40b4ea-b6a5-4f3d-9128-4b3f336c627e", "ip_address": "20.20.20.5"} |
| cece353e-619d-4a08-b2d9-253a16d179e2 | svm2-mgmt | 02:ce:ce:35:3e:61 | {"subnet_id": "79afc189-f1e7-4476-af96-e22fa39f7230", "ip_address": "192.168.1.4"} |
| 5383c984-ae23-4300-b41d-ebf9141e4a5d | svm1-left | 02:53:83:c9:84:ae | {"subnet_id": "723071a7-fc5c-4586-9e91-96af03053a0e", "ip_address": "10.10.10.4"} |
+--------------------------------------+------------+-------------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

3]. Added 2 port-tuples consisting of svm1 and svm2 to SI-pt-si

4]. Could see a ECMP route to r-vm on the left-vn

5]. Deleted the svm2 through which the traffic was going.

6]. Observed that the route-leaking between the vrfs no longer exists and the VRF mentioned in the acl doesn't exist

default-domain:admin:l-vn:service-7fd90cf4-8340-48c4-93f8-c8dca9d65615-default-domain_admin_pt-si

The setup is intact.

Kindly take a look.

[OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f)]

Review in progress for https://review.opencontrail.org/16880
Submitter: Sachin Bansal (<email address hidden>)

[OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f)]

Reviewed: https://review.opencontrail.org/16880
Committed: http://github.org/Juniper/contrail-controller/commit/ac58b63aef8637d268045b6a7e78cb30e0bb1254
Submitter: Zuul
Branch: master

commit ac58b63aef8637d268045b6a7e78cb30e0bb1254
Author: Sachin Bansal <email address hidden>
Date: Thu Feb 4 14:16:29 2016 -0800

Create the service chain with least one vm or port tuple

Currently, if any of the vm or port tuples of a service instance is not in good
state, we don't create the service chain. However, even with one of the VMs up,
the service chain can function correctly. With this chain, service chain
will only go to error if none of the VMs/port tuples are usable.

Change-Id: Ieddafb56e0b6be3a093111c10f2bdde8f486b181
Closes-Bug: 1541940

[OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f)]

Review in progress for https://review.opencontrail.org/17924
Submitter: Sachin Bansal (<email address hidden>)

[OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f)]

Review in progress for https://review.opencontrail.org/17932
Submitter: Sachin Bansal (<email address hidden>)

[OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f)]

Reviewed: https://review.opencontrail.org/17924
Committed: http://github.org/Juniper/contrail-controller/commit/4e28a780be71a264cb08dfd483405bc952b1c710
Submitter: Zuul
Branch: master

commit 4e28a780be71a264cb08dfd483405bc952b1c710
Author: Sachin Bansal <email address hidden>
Date: Fri Feb 26 11:23:36 2016 -0800

Check the correct variable vm_info_list

For checking the status of all port tuples, we first collect all info
in vm_info_list, but when we check the final status, we were using
the wrong variable name.

Change-Id: I67ac4097ddfbcf4e19a918e37681f12dc3bdb4c5
Closes-Bug: 1541940

[OpenContrail Admin (ci-admin-f)]

Reviewed: https://review.opencontrail.org/17932
Committed: http://github.org/Juniper/contrail-controller/commit/e655f9442516a2d08891470c6be149ffa12c18e1
Submitter: Zuul
Branch: R3.0

commit e655f9442516a2d08891470c6be149ffa12c18e1
Author: Sachin Bansal <email address hidden>
Date: Fri Feb 26 11:23:36 2016 -0800

Check the correct variable vm_info_list

For checking the status of all port tuples, we first collect all info
in vm_info_list, but when we check the final status, we were using
the wrong variable name.

Change-Id: I67ac4097ddfbcf4e19a918e37681f12dc3bdb4c5
Closes-Bug: 1541940
(cherry picked from commit 67dd602fe3bed643ecbc3d1b7927af02db284653)