RT-2.1 feature/experimental/isis/ate_tests/base_adjacencies_test

[manan-patel]

1: need to enable AF under isis interface solution: intf.GetOrCreateAf(telemetry.IsisTypes_AFI_TYPE_IPV4, telemetry.IsisTypes_SAFI_TYPE_UNICAST).Enabled = ygot.Bool(true) intf.GetOrCreateAf(telemetry.IsisTypes_AFI_TYPE_IPV6, telemetry.IsisTypes_SAFI_TYPE_UNICAST).Enabled = ygot.Bool(true)

2: set global isis instance value as between 1-65535 and not a string [ <1-65535> Instance id] current: glob.Instance = ygot.String(ISISName) solution: glob.Instance = ygot.String("10")

[aaronmillisor]

To add some color here, the specific concern is that RT-2.1 does not appear to be enabling ISIS on any interface, and yet still expects the isis adjacency to form. I think most platforms require explicit configuration on the interface for isis to be active on the port.

Second, although the is-is instance is defined in OC as a string it seems as though this leaf should be mapped to the IID-TLV value, which is 16 bit integer.

[xw-g]

FYI:

• https://github.com/openconfig/public/issues/97
• https://github.com/openconfig/public/pull/710

[robshakir]

@aaronmillisor Do you explicitly need the specification of the instance ID? Per https://github.com/openconfig/public/pull/710, could you give some insight into how you calculate instance ID if its not supplied by the user? (unicast is fine)

[aaronmillisor]

For completeness, in IOS XR instance-id is optional, but by configuring it you are enabling multi-instance ISIS in Cisco's mapping. In the proposal on oc PR 710 Cisco would need to modify the current instance mapping to instance-id (and it would still be optional).