bgpd: Extend BGP to communicate with the SRv6 SID Manager to allocate/release SRv6 SIDs

[cscarpitta]

PR https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/pull/15604 introduces the SRv6 SID Manager, a zebra component responsible for SID allocation/management. The SRv6 SID Manager exposes a SID allocation/release APIs, allowing clients to request and release an SRv6 SID.

This PR extends the BGP daemon to communicate with the SRv6 SID Manager to allocate/release SRv6 SIDs.

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

[cscarpitta]

@riw777 Many thanks for the review. I rebased the PR based on the merged SID manager. Can you please take a look again?

[cscarpitta]

Hi,

Please find my feedback for this PR. Is the fuzzing ok and memleak behavior analyzed and don't pose an issue?

Hi @dmytroshytyi-6WIND

Yes, I have the sanitizer running in my local environment. It does not report any issues.

[cscarpitta]

ci:retry unrelated OSPF failure

[dmytroshytyi-6WIND]

@cscarpitta , This comment should be addressed in this PR, as this PR considers BGP related extensions https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/pull/15679#discussion_r1658111269 of https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/pull/15679

It was first mentioned in the topotest to better describe the context.

Thanks

[cscarpitta]

@cscarpitta , This comment should be addressed in this PR, as this PR considers BGP related extensions #15679 (comment) of #15679

It was first mentioned in the topotest to better describe the context.

Thanks

@dmytroshytyi-6WIND

Thanks for the comment.

In this PR, we report issue in the FRR log when the user tries to allocate a SID function that is out of the valid range.

I plan to submit also another PR to reject the configuration and notify the user.

[cscarpitta]

ci:retry unrelated ospf topotest failure

[dmytroshytyi-6WIND]

@cscarpitta , This comment should be addressed in this PR, as this PR considers BGP related extensions #15679 (comment) of #15679 It was first mentioned in the topotest to better describe the context. Thanks

@dmytroshytyi-6WIND

Thanks for the comment.

In this PR, we report issue in the FRR log when the user tries to allocate a SID function that is out of the valid range.

I plan to submit also another PR to reject the configuration and notify the user.

Could you please create the new PR-placeholder ("to reject the configuration and notify the user) and cross-reference the two?

[cscarpitta]

ci:retry unrelated test failures

[riw777]

I suspect we're going to want a new topotest to cover this addition ... if it's possible to create one. @ton31337 thoughts?

[cscarpitta]

I suspect we're going to want a new topotest to cover this addition ... if it's possible to create one. @ton31337 thoughts?

Hi @riw777

Many thanks for the review.

We have another PR with the topotest (#15679). The topotest extensively tests the SID manager and the interaction with the client daemons (BGP, IS-IS).

Originally the SID manager, client daemon extension (BGP, IS-IS) and the topotest were in a single PR. But the PR was very large, hence we split into SID Manager, BGP extension, IS-IS extension, and topotest.

[riw777]

I'm kindof waiting on #15679 to pass before pushing this ...

[ahsalam]

I'm kindof waiting on #15679 to pass before pushing this ...

PR #15679 depends on this one as it tests the code to be merged here.

Once this is merged, We will rebase PR #15679 and rerun the CI.

[cscarpitta]

ci:retry CI failure is not related, rerunning

[cscarpitta]

ci:retry