Open Stack

On 08/04/2016 03:16 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
> On 08/04/2016 12:04 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
>> Yeah, I wasn't thinking when I +2'ed that. There are two use cases for
>> the pinger, one for ensuring continuous connectivity and one for
>> eventual connectivity.
>>
>> I think the revert is okay for a quick fix, but we really need a new
>> argument to the pinger for strictness to decide which behavior the test
>> is looking for.
>
> What situation requires continuous connectivity?

Maybe the test names can answer that:

test_assert_pings_during_br_int_setup_not_lost()
_test_assert_pings_during_br_phys_setup_not_lost()

In other cases we want the previous behavior - is that IP alive?  It's probably 
just best to put the old code back and make a new assert_async_ping() based on 
this code.

-Brian