Re: [net-next 2/2] selftests: seg6: add selftest for NEXT-C-SID flavor in SRv6 End.X behavior

[Paolo Lungaroni <paolo.lungaroni@uniroma2.it>]

Hi Paolo,

please see my answer below, thanks.

Il 03/08/2023 10:07, Paolo Abeni ha scritto:
> On Mon, 2023-07-31 at 19:51 +0200, Andrea Mayer wrote:
>> From: Paolo Lungaroni <paolo.lungaroni@uniroma2.it>
>>
>> This selftest is designed for testing the support of NEXT-C-SID flavor
>> for SRv6 End.X behavior. It instantiates a virtual network composed of
>> several nodes: hosts and SRv6 routers. Each node is realized using a
>> network namespace that is properly interconnected to others through veth
>> pairs, according to the topology depicted in the selftest script file.
>> The test considers SRv6 routers implementing IPv4/IPv6 L3 VPNs leveraged
>> by hosts for communicating with each other. Such routers i) apply
>> different SRv6 Policies to the traffic received from connected hosts,
>> considering the IPv4 or IPv6 protocols; ii) use the NEXT-C-SID
>> compression mechanism for encoding several SRv6 segments within a single
>> 128-bit SID address, referred to as a Compressed SID (C-SID) container.
>>
>> The NEXT-C-SID is provided as a "flavor" of the SRv6 End.X behavior,
>> enabling it to properly process the C-SID containers. The correct
>> execution of the enabled NEXT-C-SID SRv6 End.X behavior is verified
>> through reachability tests carried out between hosts belonging to the
>> same VPN.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrea Mayer <andrea.mayer@uniroma2.it>
>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Lungaroni <paolo.lungaroni@uniroma2.it>
> 
> The patches LGTM, but there is a minor issues WRT the tag area. Since
> this patch contains a
> 
> From: Paolo Lungaroni <paolo.lungaroni@uniroma2.it>
> 
> tag, Paolo's sob should come first.
> 
> According to the the newly created shell script comments, it looks like
> the patch as been co developed by both Paolo abd Andrea.
> 
> In that case the correct tag sequence would be:
> 
> SoB Paolo
> Co-devel Andrea
> SoB Andrea
> 
> Since the above is relevant for correct patch authorship attribution I
> suggest to address that in a new revision.

We will follow your suggestions and we resubmit the v2 patch with
the tags in the correct order.

> 
> BTW, I a really appreciate the descriptive-but-not-too-verbose commit
> message!
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paolo
> 

Ciao,
Paolo