Missing ISIS deviation for Nokia in encap_frr_with_reencap_vrf_test

[dracazacula]

Nokia requires missing_isis_interface_afi_safi_enable: true as deviation for configuring IS-IS

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @dracazacula, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request focuses on improving the maintainability and reusability of ISIS configuration logic within the feature profiles test suite. It consolidates redundant ISIS configuration code into a single, more robust helper function, which now supports a wider range of configuration options and better handles platform-specific behaviors. This refactoring streamlines test development and ensures consistent ISIS setup across relevant tests.

Highlights

• ISIS Configuration Refactoring: The configureISIS function, previously duplicated across multiple test files, has been centralized into a new shared helper module (otgisisblockhelpers.go) to promote code reuse and simplify maintenance.
• Enhanced ISIS Configuration Functionality: The newly centralized configureISIS function is more generic, now supporting configuration for multiple interfaces and including comprehensive logic for both IPv4 and IPv6 Address Family Identifiers (AFIs) and Subsequent Address Family Identifiers (SAFIs), along with handling various platform deviations.
• Platform Deviation Added: A new platform deviation, missing_isis_interface_afi_safi_enable, has been added to the encap_frr_with_reencap_vrf_test metadata, addressing specific platform behaviors related to ISIS interface AFI/SAFI enablement.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request refactors the configureISIS function from two separate test files into a single shared helper function to reduce code duplication. This is a good improvement. My review includes a critical fix for a compilation error due to an unexported function and a stylistic suggestion to use a more idiomatic import alias, in line with the repository's Go style guidelines.

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 20617496840

Details

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage remained the same at 10.03%

---

Totals
Change from base Build 20608788812:	0.0%
Covered Lines:	2227
Relevant Lines:	22203

---

💛 - Coveralls

[dracazacula]

/fptest virtual

[OpenConfigBot]

Pull Request Functional Test Report for #4965 / 8929d70

Virtual Devices

Device	Test	Test Documentation	Job	Raw Log
Arista cEOS		TE-16.2: encapsulation FRR scenarios TE-16.3: encapsulation FRR scenarios	5583798a	Log
Cisco 8000E		TE-16.2: encapsulation FRR scenarios TE-16.3: encapsulation FRR scenarios	6ae91c9d	Log
Cisco XRd		TE-16.2: encapsulation FRR scenarios TE-16.3: encapsulation FRR scenarios	44978fb4	Log
Juniper ncPTX		TE-16.2: encapsulation FRR scenarios TE-16.3: encapsulation FRR scenarios	a6ae21b3	Log
Nokia SR Linux		TE-16.2: encapsulation FRR scenarios TE-16.3: encapsulation FRR scenarios	1b25ed5b	Log
Openconfig Lemming		TE-16.2: encapsulation FRR scenarios TE-16.3: encapsulation FRR scenarios	e9b78c75	Log

Hardware Devices

Device	Test	Test Documentation	Raw Log
Arista 7808		TE-16.2: encapsulation FRR scenarios TE-16.3: encapsulation FRR scenarios
Cisco 8808		TE-16.2: encapsulation FRR scenarios TE-16.3: encapsulation FRR scenarios
Juniper PTX10008		TE-16.2: encapsulation FRR scenarios TE-16.3: encapsulation FRR scenarios
Nokia 7250 IXR-10e		TE-16.2: encapsulation FRR scenarios TE-16.3: encapsulation FRR scenarios

Help

[dracazacula]

/fptest virtual