Task #1942
closedNextHopFaceId test scenario
100%
Description
Develop an IntegrationTests scenario to test NDNLPv2 NextHopFaceId field.
Topology:
B--A--C
Procedure:
- start NFD on A,B,C
- on A, create a route for prefix
ndn:/P
toward B and C, where the cost toward B is lower than the cost toward C - on B, start traffic generator producer on
ndn:/P
prefix, serving payload "BBBBBBBB" - on C, start traffic generator producer on
ndn:/P
prefix, serving payload "CCCCCCCC" - on A, execute a consumer to enable NextHopFaceId feature and then express an Interest for
ndn:/P/1
without NextHopFaceId tag, expect Data with payload "BBBBBBBB" - on A, execute a consumer to enable NextHopFaceId feature and then express an Interest for
ndn:/P/2
tagged NextHopFaceId=faceB, expect Data with payload "BBBBBBBB" - on A, execute a consumer to enable NextHopFaceId feature and then express an Interest for
ndn:/P/3
tagged NextHopFaceId=faceC, expect Data with payload "CCCCCCCC" - on A, execute a consumer to enable NextHopFaceId feature and then express an Interest for
ndn:/P/4
tagged NextHopFaceId=null-face, expect either a timeout or a Nack - on A, execute a consumer to disable NextHopFaceId feature and then express an Interest for
ndn:/P/5
tagged NextHopFaceId=faceC, expect either a timeout or Data with payload "BBBBBBBB"
Files
Updated by Junxiao Shi about 10 years ago
- Description updated (diff)
- Assignee set to Junxiao Shi
I'll write the design.
After that, this Task needs reassigned for implementation.
Updated by Junxiao Shi about 9 years ago
- Description updated (diff)
- Assignee deleted (
Junxiao Shi) - Target version changed from v0.3 to v0.5
Updated by Eric Newberry over 8 years ago
- Status changed from New to In Progress
Updated by Eric Newberry over 8 years ago
I believe this task may require modifications to ndn-traffic-generator to allow the client to attach local fields to the Interests. Otherwise, I can't think of a way to tag NextHopFaceId.
Updated by Eric Newberry over 8 years ago
Should I create a new issue to reference on the ndn-traffic-generator Github page for the patch?
Updated by Eric Newberry over 8 years ago
I'm still working on this task, but further progress has been delayed until I complete #3074.
Updated by Eric Newberry over 8 years ago
I believe this task will also require Nack processing in ndn-traffic-generator. I'll work on a patch for that.
Updated by Eric Newberry over 8 years ago
It seems that the local fields must be enabled on each connection through a separate management Interest sent before the Interest containing (or not containing) NextHopFaceId. Therefore, ndnping, ndnpeek, and ndn-traffic-generator don't seem to fit this use case.
My current plan is to write a simple consumer in either C++ (compiling it with the integration test suite) or Python (requiring the addition of PyNDN to the integration testing environment). Any thoughts on this or any other suggestions?
Updated by Junxiao Shi over 8 years ago
Reply to note-11:
A consumer using ndn-cxx is better than additional PyNDN dependency, because PyNDN code has not been reviewed by NFD developers.
Updated by Eric Newberry about 8 years ago
I am currently waiting on the refactoring of local fields in NFD management to be completed before making further progress on this task.
Updated by Junxiao Shi about 8 years ago
- Blocked by Feature #3731: FaceManager commands: LocalFieldsEnabled added
Updated by Junxiao Shi about 8 years ago
I am currently waiting on the refactoring of local fields in NFD management to be completed before making further progress on this task.
Agreed. #3731 changes how "enable NextHopFaceId feature" is performed, and will affect the consumer program in this issue.
Updated by Junxiao Shi about 8 years ago
- Blocked by Feature #3783: Honor NextHopFaceId universally added
Updated by Junxiao Shi about 8 years ago
- Subject changed from ClientControlStrategy test scenario to NextHopFaceId test scenario
- Description updated (diff)
ClientControlStrategy
is deprecated in #3783, and NextHopFaceId field is honored universally. Thus, setting strategy step is deleted.
Updated by Eric Newberry almost 8 years ago
I have recently resumed work on this task.
Updated by Eric Newberry almost 8 years ago
- Status changed from In Progress to Code review
- % Done changed from 0 to 100
Updated by Junxiao Shi almost 8 years ago
- File 20161211184844.tgz 20161211184844.tgz added
Updated by Junxiao Shi almost 8 years ago
- File 20161211230354.tgz 20161211230354.tgz added
- Status changed from Code review to Closed
- Target version changed from v0.5 to v0.6