Skip to content
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

Incorrect modelling of ReserveTimeout in the reservationState machine. #15

Open
jmacauley opened this issue Nov 6, 2020 · 0 comments
Open

Comments

@jmacauley
Copy link
Contributor

This issue relates to state transitions in the reservationState machine. Using the following reserveTimeout message for illustration:

2020-09-24 06:38:24,764 [ConnectionService] reserveTimeout for {
    providerNSA = urn:ogf:network:lsanca.pacificwave.net:2016:nsa,
    correlationId = urn:uuid:3846121e-fe6b-11ea-af4e-525400c57fcf,
    connectionId = LS-cd202541ea,
    notificationId = 46,
    timeStamp = 2020-09-24T13:38:24.723135Z,
    originatingNSA = urn:ogf:network:lsanca.pacificwave.net:2016:nsa,
    originatingConnectionId = JUNOS-711498,
    timeoutValue = 120
}

I received this timeout message for reservation”LS-cd202541ea“ and transition my internal reservationState machine to “ReserveTimeout” which is a stable state in the machine. However, the next time I queried this reservation I got the following:

2020-09-24 06:39:05,970 [QuerySummary] incoming providerNSA = urn:ogf:network:lsanca.pacificwave.net:2016:nsa, QuerySummaryResultType:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<ns2:QuerySummaryResultType xmlns:ns6="http://schemas.ogf.org/nsi/2013/12/framework/types" xmlns:ns5="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:ns8="http://schemas.ogf.org/nsi/2013/12/framework/headers" xmlns:ns7="http://schemas.ogf.org/nsi/2013/12/services/point2point" xmlns:ns2="http://schemas.ogf.org/nsi/2013/12/connection/types" xmlns:ns4="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#" xmlns:ns3="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:assertion">
    <connectionId>LS-cd202541ea</connectionId>
    <globalReservationId>urn:ogf:network:lsanca.pacificwave.net:2016:pw-losa2-1:switch:EVTS.A-GOLE:conn+66c1950a-4bcf-464c-ad8c-559cc20a0edb:resource+links-connection_1:vlan+3601</globalReservationId>
    <description>deltaId+c7544ad5-7d9f-49f2-90e2-9baddecddbe6:uuid+950bc160-7fa3-4fba-8be1-daf8f9e71ff5</description>
    <criteria version="0">
        <schedule>
            <endTime>2021-09-24T13:36:24.224000Z</endTime>
        </schedule>
        <serviceType>http://services.ogf.org/nsi/2013/07/descriptions/EVTS.A-GOLE</serviceType>
        <children/>
        <ns7:p2ps>
            <capacity>10000</capacity>
            <directionality>Bidirectional</directionality>
            <symmetricPath>false</symmetricPath>
            <sourceSTP>urn:ogf:network:lsanca.pacificwave.net:2016:pw-losa2-1:snvl2-pw-sw-1?vlan=3601</sourceSTP>
            <destSTP>urn:ogf:network:lsanca.pacificwave.net:2016:pw-losa2-1:ultralight?vlan=3601</destSTP>
        </ns7:p2ps>
    </criteria>
    <requesterNSA>urn:ogf:network:lsanca.pacificwave.net:2016:sense:pw-losa2-1</requesterNSA>
    <connectionStates>
        <reservationState>ReserveHeld</reservationState>
        <provisionState>Released</provisionState>
        <lifecycleState>Created</lifecycleState>
        <dataPlaneStatus>
            <active>false</active>
            <version>0</version>
            <versionConsistent>false</versionConsistent>
        </dataPlaneStatus>
    </connectionStates>
    <notificationId>1089211</notificationId>
    <resultId>0</resultId>
</ns2:QuerySummaryResultType>

It seems that even though the reservation timed out it remains in the “ReserveHeld” state. This presents a problem in that it is not a valid transition (ie. it should be in the ReserveTimeout state), and I still see my reservation in a ReserveHeld state but cannot commit it.

In the NSI CS 2.1 protocol the aggregator also models the reserve timeout state two provide a consistent view of the reservation throughout the connection hierarchy.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant