Skip to content

GitLab

Commit 234e8699 authored by Tomek Mrugalski's avatar Tomek Mrugalski 🛰
Browse files

[2320] Tests updated

parent 1deefe27
Hide whitespace changes
Inline Side-by-side
Showing with 174 additions and 50 deletions
src/bin/dhcp4/dhcp4_messages.mes
View file @ 234e8699
......@@ -60,23 +60,23 @@ This informational message is printed every time DHCPv4 server is started.
It indicates what database backend type is being to store lease and
other information.
% DHCP4_LEASE_ADVERT lease %1 advertised (client client-id=%2, iaid=%3)
% DHCP4_LEASE_ADVERT lease %1 advertised (client client-id=%2, hwaddr=%3)
This debug message indicates that the server successfully advertised
a lease. It is up to the client to choose one server out of othe advertised
and continue allocation with that server. This is a normal behavior and
indicates successful operation.
% DHCP4_LEASE_ADVERT_FAIL failed to advertise a lease for client client-id=%1, iaid=%2
% DHCP4_LEASE_ADVERT_FAIL failed to advertise a lease for client client-id=%1, hwaddr=%2
This message indicates that the server failed to offer (in response to
received DISCOVER) a lease for a given client. There may be many reasons for
such failure. Each specific failure is logged in a separate log entry.
% DHCP4_LEASE_ALLOC lease %1 has been allocated (client duid=%2, iaid=%3)
% DHCP4_LEASE_ALLOC lease %1 has been allocated for client-id=%2, hwaddr=%3
This debug message indicates that the server successfully granted (in
response to client's REQUEST message) a lease. This is a normal behavior
and incicates successful operation.
% DHCP4_LEASE_ALLOC_FAIL failed to grant a lease for client duid=%1, iaid=%2
% DHCP4_LEASE_ALLOC_FAIL failed to grant a lease for client-id=%1, hwaddr=%2
This message indicates that the server failed to grant (in response to
received REQUEST) a lease for a given client. There may be many reasons for
such failure. Each specific failure is logged in a separate log entry.
......
src/bin/dhcp4/dhcp4_srv.cc
View file @ 234e8699
......@@ -310,9 +310,9 @@ void Dhcpv4Srv::assignLease(const Pkt4Ptr& question, Pkt4Ptr& answer) {
// with IAADDR suboption.
LOG_DEBUG(dhcp4_logger, DBG_DHCP4_DETAIL, fake_allocation?
DHCP4_LEASE_ADVERT:DHCP4_LEASE_ALLOC)
.arg(lease->addr_.toText())
.arg(client_id?client_id->toText():"(no client-id)")
.arg(hwaddr?hwaddr->toText():"(no hwaddr info)")
.arg(hint.toText());
.arg(hwaddr?hwaddr->toText():"(no hwaddr info)");
answer->setYiaddr(lease->addr_);
......
src/bin/dhcp4/tests/dhcp4_srv_unittest.cc
View file @ 234e8699
// Copyright (C) 2011-2012 Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC")
// Copyright (C) 2011-2013 Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC")
//
// Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any
// purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above
......@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include <dhcp/dhcp4.h>
#include <dhcp/option.h>
#include <dhcp4/dhcp4_srv.h>
#include <dhcp4/dhcp4_log.h>
#include <dhcpsrv/cfgmgr.h>
#include <dhcpsrv/lease_mgr.h>
#include <dhcpsrv/lease_mgr_factory.h>
......@@ -36,7 +37,6 @@ using namespace isc::dhcp;
using namespace isc::asiolink;
namespace {
const char* const INTERFACE_FILE = "interfaces.txt";
class NakedDhcpv4Srv: public Dhcpv4Srv {
// "naked" DHCPv4 server, exposes internal fields
......@@ -88,7 +88,11 @@ public:
EXPECT_TRUE(a->getYiaddr().toText() != "0.0.0.0");
}
// Generate client-id option
// Generate client-id option of specified length
// Ids with different lengths are sufficent to generate
// unique ids. If more fine grained control is required,
// tests generate client-ids on their own.
// Sets client_id_ field.
OptionPtr generateClientId(size_t size = 4) {
OptionBuffer clnt_id(size);
......@@ -103,6 +107,15 @@ public:
clnt_id.begin() + size)));
}
HWAddrPtr generateHWAddr(size_t size = 6) {
const uint8_t hw_type = 123; // just a fake number (typically 6=HTYPE_ETHER, see dhcp4.h)
OptionBuffer mac(size);
for (int i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
mac[i] = 50 + i;
}
return (HWAddrPtr(new HWAddr(mac, hw_type)));
}
// Check that address was returned from proper range, that its lease
// lifetime is correct, that T1 and T2 are returned properly
void checkAddressParams(const Pkt4Ptr& rsp, const SubnetPtr subnet,
......@@ -210,6 +223,8 @@ public:
ClientIdPtr client_id_;
};
// Sanity check. Verifies that both Dhcpv4Srv and its derived
// class NakedDhcpv4Srv can be instantiated and destroyed.
TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, basic) {
// nothing to test. DHCPv4_srv instance is created
// in test fixture. It is destroyed in destructor
......@@ -231,12 +246,17 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, basic) {
});
EXPECT_TRUE(naked_srv->getServerID());
delete srv;
delete naked_srv;
}
// Verifies that received DISCOVER can be processed correctly,
// that the OFFER message generated in response is valid and
// contains necessary options.
//
// Note: this test focuses on the packet correctness. There
// are other tests that verify correctness of the allocation
// engine. See DiscoverBasic, DiscoverHint, DiscoverNoClientId
// and DiscoverInvalidHint.
TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, processDiscover) {
NakedDhcpv4Srv* srv = new NakedDhcpv4Srv(0);
vector<uint8_t> mac(6);
......@@ -253,26 +273,26 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, processDiscover) {
pkt->setRemoteAddr(IOAddress("192.0.2.56"));
pkt->setGiaddr(IOAddress("192.0.2.67"));
// let's make it a relayed message
// Let's make it a relayed message
pkt->setHops(3);
pkt->setRemotePort(DHCP4_SERVER_PORT);
// should not throw
// Should not throw
EXPECT_NO_THROW(
offer = srv->processDiscover(pkt);
);
// should return something
// Should return something
ASSERT_TRUE(offer);
EXPECT_EQ(DHCPOFFER, offer->getType());
// this is relayed message. It should be sent back to relay address.
// This is relayed message. It should be sent back to relay address.
EXPECT_EQ(pkt->getGiaddr(), offer->getRemoteAddr());
MessageCheck(pkt, offer);
// now repeat the test for directly sent message
// Now repeat the test for directly sent message
pkt->setHops(0);
pkt->setGiaddr(IOAddress("0.0.0.0"));
pkt->setRemotePort(DHCP4_CLIENT_PORT);
......@@ -281,12 +301,12 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, processDiscover) {
offer = srv->processDiscover(pkt);
);
// should return something
// Should return something
ASSERT_TRUE(offer);
EXPECT_EQ(DHCPOFFER, offer->getType());
// this is direct message. It should be sent back to origin, not
// This is direct message. It should be sent back to origin, not
// to relay.
EXPECT_EQ(pkt->getRemoteAddr(), offer->getRemoteAddr());
......@@ -295,6 +315,13 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, processDiscover) {
delete srv;
}
// Verifies that received REQUEST can be processed correctly,
// that the ACK message generated in response is valid and
// contains necessary options.
//
// Note: this test focuses on the packet correctness. There
// are other tests that verify correctness of the allocation
// engine. See RequestBasic.
TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, processRequest) {
NakedDhcpv4Srv* srv = new NakedDhcpv4Srv(0);
vector<uint8_t> mac(6);
......@@ -588,11 +615,11 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, DiscoverInvalidHint) {
/// being used by a different client.
// This test checks that the server is offering different addresses to different
// clients in ADVERTISEs. Please note that ADVERTISE is not a guarantee that such
// and address will be assigned. Had the pool was very small and contained only
// clients in OFFERs. Please note that OFFER is not a guarantee that such
// an address will be assigned. Had the pool was very small and contained only
// 2 addresses, the third client would get the same advertise as the first one
// and this is a correct behavior. It is REQUEST that will fail for the third
// client. ADVERTISE is basically saying "if you send me a request, you will
// client. OFFER is basically saying "if you send me a request, you will
// probably get an address like this" (there are no guarantees).
TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, ManyDiscovers) {
boost::scoped_ptr<NakedDhcpv4Srv> srv;
......@@ -651,17 +678,21 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, ManyDiscovers) {
cout << "Offered address to client3=" << addr3.toText() << endl;
}
// This test verifies that incoming DISCOVER can be handled properly, that an
// OFFER is generated, that the response has an address and that address
// This test verifies that incoming REQUEST can be handled properly, that an
// ACK is generated, that the response has an address and that address
// really belongs to the configured pool.
//
// constructed very simple DISCOVER message with:
// constructed a single REQUEST message with:
// - client-id option
// - hwaddr information
// - requested address (that the client received in DISCOVER/OFFER exchange)
//
// expected returned OFFER message:
// expected returned ACK message:
// - copy of client-id
// - server-id
// - offered address
// - assigned address
//
// Test verifies that the lease is actually in the database.
TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, RequestBasic) {
boost::scoped_ptr<NakedDhcpv4Srv> srv;
ASSERT_NO_THROW( srv.reset(new NakedDhcpv4Srv(0)) );
......@@ -695,7 +726,102 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, RequestBasic) {
LeaseMgrFactory::instance().deleteLease(l->addr_);
}
// This test verifies that incoming (positive) RENEW can be handled properly, that a
// This test verifies that incoming REQUEST can be handled properly, that an
// ACK is generated, that the response has an address and that address
// really belongs to the configured pool.
//
// constructed 3 REQUEST messages with:
// - client-id option (differs between messages)
// - hwaddr information (differs between messages)
//
// expected returned ACK message:
// - copy of client-id
// - server-id
// - assigned address (different for each client)
TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, ManyRequests) {
boost::scoped_ptr<NakedDhcpv4Srv> srv;
ASSERT_NO_THROW( srv.reset(new NakedDhcpv4Srv(0)) );
const IOAddress req_addr1("192.0.2.105");
const IOAddress req_addr2("192.0.2.101");
const IOAddress req_addr3("192.0.2.109");
const IOAddress relay("192.0.2.1");
Pkt4Ptr req1 = Pkt4Ptr(new Pkt4(DHCPOFFER, 1234));
Pkt4Ptr req2 = Pkt4Ptr(new Pkt4(DHCPOFFER, 2345));
Pkt4Ptr req3 = Pkt4Ptr(new Pkt4(DHCPOFFER, 3456));
req1->setRemoteAddr(relay);
req2->setRemoteAddr(relay);
req3->setRemoteAddr(relay);
req1->setYiaddr(req_addr1);
req2->setYiaddr(req_addr2);
req3->setYiaddr(req_addr3);
req1->setHWAddr(generateHWAddr(6));
req2->setHWAddr(generateHWAddr(7));
req3->setHWAddr(generateHWAddr(8));
// different client-id sizes
OptionPtr clientid1 = generateClientId(4); // length 4
OptionPtr clientid2 = generateClientId(5); // length 5
OptionPtr clientid3 = generateClientId(6); // length 6
req1->addOption(clientid1);
req2->addOption(clientid2);
req3->addOption(clientid3);
// Pass it to the server and get an advertise
Pkt4Ptr ack1 = srv->processRequest(req1);
Pkt4Ptr ack2 = srv->processRequest(req2);
Pkt4Ptr ack3 = srv->processRequest(req3);
// check if we get response at all
checkResponse(ack1, DHCPACK, 1234);
checkResponse(ack2, DHCPACK, 2345);
checkResponse(ack3, DHCPACK, 3456);
IOAddress addr1 = ack1->getYiaddr();
IOAddress addr2 = ack2->getYiaddr();
IOAddress addr3 = ack3->getYiaddr();
// Check that every client received the address it requested
EXPECT_EQ(req_addr1.toText(), addr1.toText());
EXPECT_EQ(req_addr2.toText(), addr2.toText());
EXPECT_EQ(req_addr3.toText(), addr3.toText());
// Check that the assigned address is indeed from the configured pool
checkAddressParams(ack1, subnet_);
checkAddressParams(ack2, subnet_);
checkAddressParams(ack3, subnet_);
// check DUIDs
checkServerId(ack1, srv->getServerID());
checkServerId(ack2, srv->getServerID());
checkServerId(ack3, srv->getServerID());
checkClientId(ack1, clientid1);
checkClientId(ack2, clientid2);
checkClientId(ack3, clientid3);
// Check that leases are in the database
Lease4Ptr l = checkLease(ack1, clientid1, req1->getHWAddr(), addr1);
EXPECT_TRUE(l);
l = checkLease(ack2, clientid2, req2->getHWAddr(), addr2);
l = checkLease(ack3, clientid3, req3->getHWAddr(), addr3);
// Finally check that the addresses offered are different
EXPECT_NE(addr1.toText(), addr2.toText());
EXPECT_NE(addr2.toText(), addr3.toText());
EXPECT_NE(addr3.toText(), addr1.toText());
cout << "Offered address to client1=" << addr1.toText() << endl;
cout << "Offered address to client2=" << addr2.toText() << endl;
cout << "Offered address to client3=" << addr3.toText() << endl;
}
// This test verifies that incoming (positive) REQUEST/Renewing can be handled properly, that a
// REPLY is generated, that the response has an address and that address
// really belongs to the configured pool and that lease is actually renewed.
//
......@@ -744,6 +870,7 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, RenewBasic) {
Pkt4Ptr req = Pkt4Ptr(new Pkt4(DHCPREQUEST, 1234));
req->setRemoteAddr(IOAddress(addr));
req->setYiaddr(addr);
req->setCiaddr(addr); // client's address
req->addOption(clientid);
req->addOption(srv->getServerID());
......@@ -809,16 +936,9 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, sanityCheck) {
RFCViolation);
}
// @todo: write tests for RELEASE
// This test verifies that incoming (positive) RELEASE can be handled properly,
// that a REPLY is generated, that the response has status code and that the
// lease is indeed removed from the database.
//
// expected:
// - returned REPLY message has copy of client-id
// - returned REPLY message has server-id
// - returned REPLY message has IA that does not include an IAADDR
// - lease is actually removed from LeaseMgr
// This test verifies that incoming (positive) RELEASE can be handled properly.
// As there is no REPLY in DHCPv4, the only thing to verify here is that
// the lease is indeed removed from the database.
TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, ReleaseBasic) {
boost::scoped_ptr<NakedDhcpv4Srv> srv;
ASSERT_NO_THROW( srv.reset(new NakedDhcpv4Srv(0)) );
......@@ -892,12 +1012,6 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, ReleaseBasic) {
// 1. there is no such lease at all
// 2. there is such a lease, but it is assigned to a different IAID
// 3. there is such a lease, but it belongs to a different client
//
// expected:
// - returned REPLY message has copy of client-id
// - returned REPLY message has server-id
// - returned REPLY message has IA that includes STATUS-CODE
// - No lease in LeaseMgr
TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, ReleaseReject) {
boost::scoped_ptr<NakedDhcpv4Srv> srv;
ASSERT_NO_THROW( srv.reset(new NakedDhcpv4Srv(0)) );
......@@ -936,7 +1050,7 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, ReleaseReject) {
// parity with similar test in DHCPv6.
EXPECT_NO_THROW(srv->processRelease(rel));
// CASE 2: Lease is known and belongs to this client, but to a different client-id
// CASE 2: Lease is known and belongs to this client, but to a different hardware
SCOPED_TRACE("CASE 2: Lease is known and belongs to this client, but uses different HW addr");
// Let's create a lease and put it in the LeaseMgr
......@@ -973,15 +1087,16 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv4SrvTest, ReleaseReject) {
l = LeaseMgrFactory::instance().getLease4(addr);
ASSERT_TRUE(l);
// Final sanity check. Verify that with valid hw and client-id release is working
// Final sanity check. Verify that with valid hw and client-id release is successful
rel->delOption(DHO_DHCP_CLIENT_IDENTIFIER);
rel->addOption(clientid);
// It should work this time
EXPECT_NO_THROW(srv->processRelease(rel));
// Check that the lease is not there
l = LeaseMgrFactory::instance().getLease4(addr);
EXPECT_FALSE(l);
}
} // end of anonymous namespace
src/bin/dhcp4/tests/dhcp4_unittests.cc
View file @ 234e8699
......@@ -13,15 +13,24 @@
// PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.
#include <log/logger_support.h>
#include <dhcp4/dhcp4_log.h>
#include <gtest/gtest.h>
int
main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
::testing::InitGoogleTest(&argc, argv);
isc::log::initLogger();
// Uncomment those to get much more verbose tests
/*
isc::log::initLogger("b10-dhcp4",
isc::log::DEBUG,
isc::log::MAX_DEBUG_LEVEL, NULL, false);
isc::dhcp::dhcp4_logger.setSeverity(isc::log::DEBUG, 99);
*/
int result = RUN_ALL_TESTS();
return (result);
......
src/bin/dhcp6/tests/dhcp6_srv_unittest.cc
View file @ 234e8699
......@@ -582,7 +582,7 @@ TEST_F(Dhcpv6SrvTest, SolicitInvalidHint) {
// This test checks that the server is offering different addresses to different
// clients in ADVERTISEs. Please note that ADVERTISE is not a guarantee that such
// and address will be assigned. Had the pool was very small and contained only
// an address will be assigned. Had the pool was very small and contained only
// 2 addresses, the third client would get the same advertise as the first one
// and this is a correct behavior. It is REQUEST that will fail for the third
// client. ADVERTISE is basically saying "if you send me a request, you will
......
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment