Publish NI routes in a deterministic and easy-to-read order #4298
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
milan-zededa
force-pushed
the
rt-table-improvements
branch
from
79ef9bb to
2ee6e8f
Compare
| case generic.IPv4RouteTypename: | ||
| ipVer = types.AddressTypeIPV4 | ||
| case generic.IPv6RouteTypename: | ||
| ipVer = types.AddressTypeIPV6 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see the Type() function may also return generic items.UnsupportedRouteTypename. Shouldn't we add it here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We will leave the zero value types.AddressTypeNone in that case which is OK I think.
| // first for clarity, followed by other routes ordered by prefix length, | ||
| // with more specific routes (longer prefixes) listed before broader ones. | ||
| // This is at least how Linux lists the routes of a routing table. | ||
| sort.Slice(routes, func(i, j int) bool { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The entire function is a good candidate for a Unit test, if you have time for that)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will you add it to this PR? Or we should not wait for it and it comes later?
milan-zededa
force-pushed
the
rt-table-improvements
branch
2 times, most recently
from
76de04f to
6ed060b
Compare
First IPv4 routes will be listed, then IPv6 routes. Inside the set of routes of the same IP version, default routes appear first for clarity, followed by other routes ordered by prefix length, with more specific routes (longer prefixes) listed before broader ones. This is at least how Linux lists the routes of a routing table. We also want to avoid returning <nil> as destination network for default routes, and instead show destination as 0.0.0.0/0 or ::/0 Signed-off-by: Milan Lenco <[email protected]>
milan-zededa
force-pushed
the
rt-table-improvements
branch
from
6ed060b to
4f7635f
Compare
OhmSpectator
approved these changes
Sep 26, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
First IPv4 routes will be listed, then IPv6 routes. Inside the set of routes of the same IP version, default routes appear first for clarity, followed by other routes ordered by prefix length, with more specific routes (longer prefixes) listed before broader ones. This is at least how Linux lists the routes of a routing table.
We also want to avoid returning
<nil>as destination network for default routes, and instead show destination as0.0.0.0/0or::/0