commit 4b36963f32d56003b27d458f0fad7e13899b6606
Author: Naveen N <email address hidden>
Date: Mon Dec 8 03:28:15 2014 -0800
* In case of inline service instance, VRF translate action would specify
the vrf in which route lookup happens, this translated VRF might not
have the local vm peer path, since control node would have leaked the
routes.
In this case with ecmp, where one SI resides locally and other SI
instance is on remote compute node, both forward flow and reverse flow
should have the key set to policy enabled nexthop of the interface.
For picking the reverse flow key, we were looking inside the composite
NH and getting interface NH, but this interface NH would be policy
disabled, hence reverse flow key calculated was wrong.
Correcting the same
Closes-bug:#1394089
Reviewed: https:/ /review. opencontrail. org/5388 github. org/Juniper/ contrail- controller/ commit/ 4b36963f32d5600 3b27d458f0fad7e 13899b6606
Committed: http://
Submitter: Zuul
Branch: master
commit 4b36963f32d5600 3b27d458f0fad7e 13899b6606
Author: Naveen N <email address hidden>
Date: Mon Dec 8 03:28:15 2014 -0800
* In case of inline service instance, VRF translate action would specify
the vrf in which route lookup happens, this translated VRF might not
have the local vm peer path, since control node would have leaked the
routes.
In this case with ecmp, where one SI resides locally and other SI
instance is on remote compute node, both forward flow and reverse flow
should have the key set to policy enabled nexthop of the interface.
For picking the reverse flow key, we were looking inside the composite
NH and getting interface NH, but this interface NH would be policy
disabled, hence reverse flow key calculated was wrong.
Correcting the same
Closes-bug:#1394089
Change-Id: Ia07edf6997c7ab ffe817049b7bf53 6c9d47d8e13