[LS-627] Discrepancy in POP & Path Details Across Route Builder and Traffic Reports Created: 04/Sep/25  Updated: 14/Apr/26  Due: 12/Sep/25  Resolved: 07/Apr/26

Status: Dev Scheduled
Project: L3 Support
Component/s: NEP
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Bug Priority: Normal
Reporter: Priyasha Tiwari Assignee: Srishti Kashyap
Resolution: Incomplete Votes: 0
Labels: nep_dev
Remaining Estimate: 0 minutes
Time Spent: 2 days, 7 hours, 42 minutes
Original Estimate: Not Specified

Attachments: PNG File ABUP01 INTERFACE REPORT 1.png     PNG File ABUP01 INTERFACE REPORT.png     PNG File ABUP01 OSSIP.png     PNG File ABUP01 ROUTE 2.png     PNG File ABUP01 ROUTE.png     JPEG File LS-627.jpg     PNG File RB ABUP01 SITE.png     PNG File SITE POP SNAP .png     PNG File TRAFFIC SNAP ABUP01.png     PNG File abup01 ip data.png     PNG File abup01 ipv6.png     PNG File vlan abup01.png    
Issue Links:
Relates
relates to LS-303 Site POP path Report Data is not corr... Closed
Customer:
Airtel India
Planned Start:
Planned End:
Rejected By: Srishti Kashyap
Actual Start:
Date of Baselining:

 Description   

as observed , for node SRAN_ABUP01, the Route Builder report shows L2 POP as MDN31_UW, while the Site POP Path and Traffic reports are showing MDN02_UW.
this issue is observed for all the circle and i have shared one sample case for UW Circle .

this NE name in RB report have only 5 routes for 5 different destination and in the logical view for this sites we have 7 different routes than all these Vlan's are not there in vlan report .. ideally the old route should be deleted for which the interface is not defined in the interface report. and only single route should be reflected in the logical view through one L2 pop and same L2 should reflect in the Site pop path report and traffic report and other enteries should be deleted ..
here the sample case as we can see the vlan 2616 and 2776 as highlighted in snap should be removed and this Vlan is not avilable in the Vlan report also.

 Comments   
Comment by Hassan Abdine [ 05/Sep/25 ]

provide the details with last status and clear use case.

Comment by Priyasha Tiwari [ 12/Sep/25 ]

@Basant share small xml of UW circle .. path mention below..
/product/Airtel/nep_packages/auto-importer/Dumps/huawei/m2000/logical/CFG/PAN INDIA LOGICAL HUA CORE/10.35.133.11

Comment by Abir Messaikeh [ 17/Oct/25 ]

pending LS-700 Missing PoP site as the issue is broken path

Comment by Srishti Kashyap [ 17/Oct/25 ]

Dear Priyasha,
It was found that all the sites which are not reflecting on pop site report are not pop site also they have ,Access Route Status: Vlan Path Broken. and showing routed in rb report which is not correct hence it is proposed to set the Access Route Status as Failed and move the current Access Route Status to Access Error Details for sites that are not reflecting in POP site and have Access Route Status: Vlan Path Broken.
This porposal last denied and we reverted you back for LS-700 that sites are missing pop info from xml.

Comment by Priyasha Tiwari [ 30/Oct/25 ]

srishit, this issue is not related to site pop category .. in this issue the L2 pop in rb report and site pop path and traffic report are not same .. ideally the l2 pop for the mentioned site should be same in all the reports .

Comment by Priyasha Tiwari [ 30/Oct/25 ]

srishit, this issue is not related to site pop category .. in this issue the L2 pop in rb report and site pop path and traffic report are not same .. ideally the l2 pop for the mentioned site should be same in all the reports .

Comment by Srishti Kashyap [ 12/Nov/25 ]

Hi Dear,
Please provide some sample cases related to the issue from the PROD small circle environment.
This will help in verifying and analyzing the problem more effectively.

Comment by Priyasha Tiwari [ 12/Nov/25 ]

as requested ,sample case from a small circle HP prod shared on email please check .. Node name -LABWL01

Comment by Bessem Manita [ 14/Nov/25 ]

Fix for deleting old invalid routes was released in patch 3.7.71.526.

Comment by Priyasha Tiwari [ 26/Nov/25 ]

as discussed API is requested from the customer for the old node deletion

Comment by Priyasha Tiwari [ 30/Dec/25 ]

API is still under validation , and awaiting customer confirmation

Comment by Priyasha Tiwari [ 07/Apr/26 ]

please share the API detailed working in JIRA also ,to avoid any confusion

Comment by Priyasha Tiwari [ 07/Apr/26 ]

i need the detailed working of the API,

Generated at Fri Apr 17 09:37:32 EEST 2026 using JIRA 6.1.4#6159-sha1:44eaedef2e4a625c6c7183698b2468d4719c20dc.