NETOBSERV-2055: Xlat ICMP code is redundant with icmp code field so removing it

[msherif1234]

Description

check the protocol to set the appropriate fields in xlat record

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

• Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist.
• Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
• Does this PR require product documentation?
  • If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
• Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
  • If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
• Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
  • If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
• QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
  • Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
  • Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
  • No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

[openshift-ci-robot]

@msherif1234: This pull request references NETOBSERV-2055 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.19.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

Description

check the protocol to set the appropriate fields in xlat record

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

• Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist.
• Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
• Does this PR require product documentation?
• If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
• Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
• If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
• Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
• If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
• QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
• Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
• Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
• No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[msherif1234]

cc'd @Amoghrd
/ok-to-test

[github-actions]

New image:
quay.io/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent:c3a489a

It will expire after two weeks.

To deploy this build, run from the operator repo, assuming the operator is running:

USER=netobserv VERSION=c3a489a make set-agent-image

[Amoghrd]

@msherif1234 It still shows up as 0 instead of n/a. I tried both ping and curl to the service IP from the client pod and resulting flows are seen below

Flows with ICMP protocol have ICMP code 0 and Xlat ICMP code 0.
But flows with TCP protocol have ICMP code n/a and Xlat ICMP code 0 which is incorrect.

And could the JSON for Xlat ICMP filed be updated from XlatIcmpId to XlatIcmpCode to remain consistent with default field names

[msherif1234]

I added check for 0 too but we have to update flp 1st to be able to test this
I will do that once #507 merge

[msherif1234]

/ok-to-test

[github-actions]

New image:
quay.io/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent:05aabc6

It will expire after two weeks.

To deploy this build, run from the operator repo, assuming the operator is running:

USER=netobserv VERSION=05aabc6 make set-agent-image

[msherif1234]

/ok-to-test

[github-actions]

New image:
quay.io/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent:5f49b01

It will expire after two weeks.

To deploy this build, run from the operator repo, assuming the operator is running:

USER=netobserv VERSION=5f49b01 make set-agent-image

[msherif1234]

/ok-to-test

[github-actions]

New image:
quay.io/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent:a96744e

It will expire after two weeks.

To deploy this build, run from the operator repo, assuming the operator is running:

USER=netobserv VERSION=a96744e make set-agent-image

[jotak]

Looking into the linux headers / nf_conntrack_man_proto, sounds like DCCP can also have port?

[msherif1234]

but we don't support or parse that protocol in openshift

[jotak]

yeah never mind .. no point doing it in xlat if we don't do it in the main path anyway

[msherif1234]

/ok-to-test

[jotak]

/lgtm

[msherif1234]

/ok-to-test

[openshift-ci]

@msherif1234: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
ci/prow/qe-e2e-tests	63dcf7c	link	false	/test qe-e2e-tests

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[Amoghrd]

/ok-to-test

[github-actions]

New image:
quay.io/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent:e98eda1

It will expire after two weeks.

To deploy this build, run from the operator repo, assuming the operator is running:

USER=netobserv VERSION=e98eda1 make set-agent-image

[Amoghrd]

/label qe-approved

[openshift-ci-robot]

@msherif1234: This pull request references NETOBSERV-2055 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.19.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

Description

check the protocol to set the appropriate fields in xlat record

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

• Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist.
• Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
• Does this PR require product documentation?
• If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
• Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
• If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
• Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
• If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
• QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
• Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
• Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
• No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[msherif1234]

/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: msherif1234

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [msherif1234]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment