Closed BarbarossaTM closed 1 year ago
Merging #449 (3892a5f) into master (2f55bf4) will increase coverage by
0.01%
. The diff coverage is66.66%
.
:exclamation: Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the GitHub App Integration for your organization. Read more.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #449 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 54.33% 54.34% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 146 146
Lines 7894 7901 +7
==========================================
+ Hits 4289 4294 +5
- Misses 3400 3401 +1
- Partials 205 206 +1
Flag | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
unittests | 54.34% <66.66%> (+0.01%) |
:arrow_up: |
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Files Changed | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
protocols/bgp/server/fsm_address_family.go | 73.41% <ø> (ø) |
|
route/path.go | 84.79% <0.00%> (-1.01%) |
:arrow_down: |
routingtable/adjRIBIn/adj_rib_in.go | 59.85% <85.71%> (+1.52%) |
:arrow_up: |
:mega: We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more
This does two things:
Hide routes received via eBGP when the AS-Path is empty
I was wondering if it would be a good idea to just create an AS-Path with the peer ASN in it, but depending on what the peer did to their policies this may not reflect reality and may actually further support leaking prefixes or something. So I decided to err on the side of caution here and consider prefixes received via eBGP and w/o an AS-Path as invalid/hidden. We may want to ignore this check when learning prefixes via BMP, however I would hope that no BGPd out there would accept it.
Default local-pref for eBGP prefixes to 100
This is a follow-up on a previous PR, which only took effect when running BIO as BGP server and not as library. This fixes the residual places.