[FNT] Forwarding viability Test aggregate_all_not_viable_test

[rahulsy26]

Summary:
This code is to Test forwarding-viable with LAG and routing

Ensure that when all LAG member become set with forwarding-viable == FALSE.

forwarding-viable=false impact only transmit traffic on all member port.
All member ports set with forwarding-viable=false can receive all type of traffic and forward it normally (same as with forwarding-viable=true)
ISIS adjacency is established on LAG port w/ all member set to forwarding-viable == FALSE
Traffic that normally egress LAG with all members set to forwarding-viable == FALSE is forwarded by the next best egress interface/LAG.

[OpenConfigBot]

Pull Request Functional Test Report for #2953 / 3a81f58

Virtual Devices

Device	Test	Test Documentation	Job	Raw Log
Arista cEOS		RT-5.7: Aggregate Not Viable All	7bc46c61	Log
Cisco 8000E		RT-5.7: Aggregate Not Viable All	6d288713	Log
Cisco XRd		RT-5.7: Aggregate Not Viable All	d4df983b	Log
Juniper ncPTX		RT-5.7: Aggregate Not Viable All	bad6c573	Log
Nokia SR Linux		RT-5.7: Aggregate Not Viable All	cf9c2c6f	Log
Openconfig Lemming		RT-5.7: Aggregate Not Viable All	05c4d269	Log

Hardware Devices

Device	Test	Test Documentation	Raw Log
Arista 7808		RT-5.7: Aggregate Not Viable All
Cisco 8808		RT-5.7: Aggregate Not Viable All
Juniper PTX10008		RT-5.7: Aggregate Not Viable All
Nokia 7250 IXR-10e		RT-5.7: Aggregate Not Viable All

Help

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9349681911

Details

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage remained the same at 55.5%

---

Totals
Change from base Build 9346450617:	0.0%
Covered Lines:	1983
Relevant Lines:	3573

---

💛 - Coveralls

[bkreddy143]

@dplore , i think the idea of forwarding-viable is switch to backup NHG if available when all member of primary are set forwarding-viable=False . I don't think we have that coverage. Can we add backup NHG pointing to LAG3 and verify that gRIBI traffic switched to LAG3 when all member of LAG2 are set to False and similarly it is switched back to primary ( LAG2) when any of the member set to forwarding-viable True . ( PS: we can ignore this case here if it planned as part of gRIBI test cases)

[rahulsy26]

Here instead of NHG we are switching all the traffic to LAG3 if all ports of LAG2 are set forwarding-viable=False.

Please let me know if anything need to be added so that i will change it accordingly.

[bkreddy143]

@rahulsy26 , Iam talking about gRIBI route traffic . that is getting dropped when all members of LAG2 are down.

[rahulsy26]

Lets wait for @dplore to comment on this

[dplore]

Yes, we should include a backup-NHG. We will have the scenario where Backup-NHG is present and a LAG will have all member interfaces set to forwarding-viable=FALSE. The backup-NHG should take effect in this scenario. @nflath for any other comment

[nflath]

We want at least one test for the backup-NHG programming, correct.

[rahulsy26]

Noted