Add DEFAULT_INSTANCE under connection-points endpoints

[mikewiebe]

Change Scope

• Expand when statement under /network-instances/network-instance/connection-points/connection-point/endpoints to include oc-ni-types:DEFAULT_INSTANCE'
• The change adds to the list of network-instance types that are supported so in that sense the change is backwards compatible
• Update on 12/20/23 expands the scope slightly for this PR:
  • Fixes a bug in the model by removing the when statement for /network-instances/network-instance/connection-points/connection-point/endpoints/endpoint/vxlan. The when statement references identity ENDPOINT_TYPE but it only includes LOCAL and REMOTE, not VXLAN.

The /network-instances/network-instance/connection-points/connection-point/endpoints/endpoint/vxlan container was added as part of the original EVPN support for the network-instance model. Change Details

This container represents the configuration and operational state parameters relating to a VXLAN tunnel end-point interfaces. The when clause should have been expanded with the original commit since this information should belong to the default network instance.

The layer2 network instance include already has the expanded when clause that includes DEFAULT_INSTANCE.

        uses l2ni-instance {
            when "./config/type = 'oc-ni-types:L2VSI'
                  or ./config/type = 'oc-ni-types:L2P2P'
                  or ./config/type = 'oc-ni-types:L2L3'
                  or ./config/type = 'oc-ni-types:DEFAULT_INSTANCE'" {
                  description
                    "Layer 2 configuration parameters included when
                    a network instance is a Layer 2 instance or a
                    combined L2L3 instance";
            }
        }

[OpenConfigBot]

No major YANG version changes in commit 3e9b4c8

[dplore]

This change looks good. I also think it is non-breaking as it is relaxing the when statement to allow an additional condition.
This will be reviewed at the Dec 19, 2023 OC Operators meeting.

[dplore]

@oscargdd can you please take a look

[dplore]

@wenovus can you investigate the pyangbind test failure?

[wenovus]

@wenovus can you investigate the pyangbind test failure?

Hi, I see that pyangbind@7613086 Succeeded, where are you seeing the failure?

[dplore]

Ah, I guess closing and reopening the PR did in fact cause it to re-run and it passed this time. We can ignore this issue for now.

[dplore]

LGTM. This is a last call for comments. This will be merged on Feb 15, 2024