properly handle existing routes on VRF attachement/detechment #477
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When attaching a VRF to or from a VLAN interface, we remove the ip addresses since we will get new address notifications for the correct new table (VRF). But routes may also already exist, and may stay in the original table. Especially on detachment, we fail to remove the routes again, so VRF assigned routes can remain.
Additionally, the IPv6 LL route check didn't consider the table, so it would fail to remove the VRF IPv6 LL route if there were other non-VRF LL routes. So make sure to match on the table as well.
Motivation and Context
Fixes #290
How Has This Been Tested?
Ran weekend pipelines with PR applied, no observed regressions.
To verify ran the vrf-lacp test on as4610.
After running the test:
(VRF targeting) routes are now gone after deletion, and match the actual route table.