virtualAddresses w/mask plus shareAddresses true not idempotent

[wncocz]

Environment

• Application Services Version: 3.49.0 and 3.52.0
• BIG-IP Version: 15.1.10.3

Summary

If a (non-/32) subnet mask is specified on virtualAddresses, and shareAddresses is true, re-posting an already-deployed declaration fails with error. Observed similar behavior whether the virtualAddress is 0.0.0.0/0, 192.168.0.0/16, or 10.13.13.0/24

Steps To Reproduce

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Submit the following declaration:

{
	"class": "ADC",
	"id": "test-0001",
	"schemaVersion": "3.49.0",
	"test": {
		"class": "Tenant",
		"test": {
			"class": "Application",
			"template": "generic",
			"test_fwd24": {
				"class": "Service_Forwarding",
				"forwardingType": "ip",
				"layer4": "udp",
				"allowVlans": [{ "bigip": "/Common/VLAN13" }],
				"profileL4": { "bigip": "/Common/fastL4" },
				"snat": { "use": "test_snat" },
				"virtualAddresses": [
					[ "10.13.13.0/24", "10.12.12.0/23" ]
				],
				"shareAddresses": true,
				"virtualPort": 3999
			},
			"test_snat": {
				"class": "SNAT_Pool",
				"snatAddresses": [
					"10.12.12.12"
				]
			}
		}
	}
}

2. Observe successful deployment
3. Submit it again
4. Observe the following error response:

    results:
    - code: 422
      declarationId: test-0001
      host: localhost
      message: declaration failed
      response: '01020036:3: The requested virtual address (/Common/10.13.13.0/24) was not found.'
      runTime: 12647
      tenant: test

Expected Behavior

Subsequent deployments should succeed without error (or change).

Actual Behavior

Observed error occurs

[wncocz]

In F5 support case #00686153, I was told in mid-November that this would be addressed in the upcoming release tentatively scheduled for Dec 16, 2024. We've gone four months with no AS3 release. Is there any update? (I would ask via my support case, but that has been closed because "asked and answered.")

[wncocz]

Problem persists in current AS3 3.54.0-7. New F5 support case #00911311. Anyone home?

[seamlessfirework]

In some issues here the mail address is mentioned to prioritze: [email protected]

Additionally reach out to your AM to point out that your issue hasn‘t been solved for months.

[mdditt2000]

Resolved in AS3-55