Skip to content

Add accept action to policy-forwarding supported actions #1269

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ihebboubaker
Copy link

Change Scope

  • The 'accept' action is to be included in the set of actions supported by policy-forwarding.

@@ -270,6 +276,14 @@ submodule openconfig-pf-forwarding-policies {
packets that match the rule.";
}

leaf accept {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What happens when this leaf is set to false? Packets should be dropped?

leaf accept {
type boolean;
default false;
description
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd like some clarification either in this leaf, or elsewhere, as to how this coexists with ACLs. What is the order of operations -- policy-forwarding and then ACL or ACL then policy-forwarding? Can both be used on a particular link?

Copy link
Member

@dplore dplore left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In routing-policy there are ACCEPT, REJECT and NEXT_STATEMENT results per policy. NEXT_STATEMENT is default. Perhaps we should follow a similar pattern here.

Copy link

@LimeHat LimeHat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you please explain the use case? It is not clear what is the purpose of the proposed action.

@dplore dplore self-assigned this May 10, 2025
@dplore
Copy link
Member

dplore commented May 10, 2025

@ihebboubaker please do state some operational use cases where the existing model doesn't meet the needs.

@dplore dplore moved this to Waiting for author in OC Operator Review May 12, 2025
@dplore
Copy link
Member

dplore commented May 12, 2025

/gcbrun

@OpenConfigBot
Copy link

No major YANG version changes in commit 49680ce

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: Waiting for author
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants