[CORENET-5350] [4.19] OVN Kubernetes support for BGP as a routing protocol - Red Hat Issue Tracker

Type: Epic
Resolution: Unresolved
Priority: Critical
Fix Version/s: None
Affects Version/s: None
Component/s: OVN Kubernetes
Labels:
- 4.19-candidate
- migrated-from-sdn

Epic Name:
[4.19] OVN Kubernetes support for BGP as a routing protocol
Work Type:
Strategic Portfolio Work
Blocked:
False
Blocked Reason:
None
Ready:
False
Color Status:
Red
Epic Status:
In Progress
Feature Link:
OCPSTRAT-1361 - BGP for UDN GA
Parent Link:
OCPSTRAT-1361BGP for UDN GA
Hierarchy Progress Bar:

35% To Do, 47% In Progress, 18% Done
Status Summary:
Hide

[surya - based on BGP sync on April 10th] The reason why this EPIC is red status is because:

Two of the Isolation bugs are at risk in being completed on time : https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-52462 and https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-52278 and routes disappearing bug https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-52194

Downstream tests are at risk in being completed on time https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CORENET-5875 and https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CORENET-5876 and https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CORENET-5854 - we don't have any tests merged into origin as of 10th April

Other caveats to remember:

LGW and L2 Advertised UDNs will not be done: known limitation will be documented

ETP=local, NodePorts are funky and won't work with BGP advertised networks: known limitation will be documented.

Remaining question mark is QE: If FG lifting is moved to 25th April is that enough time for QE to do their bits? We won't be removing FG by 18th for sure

Ask PMs in today's PM Sync call about the CNV BGP Testing Epic -> if that should block our FG or can we treat CNV any potential issues as just bugs?
Show
[surya - based on BGP sync on April 10th] The reason why this EPIC is red status is because: Two of the Isolation bugs are at risk in being completed on time : https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-52462 and https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-52278 and routes disappearing bug https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-52194 Downstream tests are at risk in being completed on time https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CORENET-5875 and https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CORENET-5876 and https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CORENET-5854 - we don't have any tests merged into origin as of 10th April Other caveats to remember: LGW and L2 Advertised UDNs will not be done: known limitation will be documented ETP=local, NodePorts are funky and won't work with BGP advertised networks: known limitation will be documented. Remaining question mark is QE: If FG lifting is moved to 25th April is that enough time for QE to do their bits? We won't be removing FG by 18th for sure Ask PMs in today's PM Sync call about the CNV BGP Testing Epic -> if that should block our FG or can we treat CNV any potential issues as just bugs?
[QE] How to address?:
---

WSJF:
0

SFDC Cases Links:
SFDC Cases Open:
SFDC Cases Counter:

Intelligence Requested:
Market:

Epic Goal

Left over from 4.18 (potentially BGP+UDN, egress IP)
perf/scale
UX fixes (ovnk specific API)
Enabling subset of nodes selected for BGP advertisement with pod network (requirement from customers)

Why is this important?

Planning Done Checklist

The following items must be completed on the Epic prior to moving the Epic from Planning to the ToDo status

Priority+ is set by engineering
Epic must be Linked to a +Parent Feature
Target version+ must be set
Assignee+ must be set
(Enhancement Proposal is Implementable
(No outstanding questions about major work breakdown
(Are all Stakeholders known? Have they all been notified about this item?
Does this epic affect SD? {}Have they been notified{+}? (View plan definition for current suggested assignee)
1. Please use the “Discussion Needed: Service Delivery Architecture Overview” checkbox to facilitate the conversation with SD Architects. The SD architecture team monitors this checkbox which should then spur the conversation between SD and epic stakeholders. Once the conversation has occurred, uncheck the “Discussion Needed: Service Delivery Architecture Overview” checkbox and record the outcome of the discussion in the epic description here.
2. The guidance here is that unless it is very clear that your epic doesn’t have any managed services impact, default to use the Discussion Needed checkbox to facilitate that conversation.

Additional information on each of the above items can be found here: Networking Definition of Planned

Acceptance Criteria

CI - MUST be running successfully with tests automated
Release Technical Enablement - Provide necessary release enablement
details and documents.

...

Dependencies (internal and external)

...

Previous Work (Optional):

1. …

Open questions::

1. …

Done Checklist

CI - CI is running, tests are automated and merged.
Release Enablement <link to Feature Enablement Presentation>
DEV - Upstream code and tests merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
DEV - Upstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR or GitHub Issue>
DEV - Downstream build attached to advisory: <link to errata>
QE - Test plans in Polarion: <link or reference to Polarion>
QE - Automated tests merged: <link or reference to automated tests>
DOC - Downstream documentation merged: <link to meaningful PR>