Add the ability to perform net coverage on `interfaceProperties`

[Rick Donato]

It would be great to add the ability to perform net coverage on the interfaceProperties question.

[ratulm]

@rickdonato - we'll look into it.

what would you like the semantics to be -- all interfaces returned by the question are deemed covered?

[Rick Donato]

Thanks @ratulm yep that would be good. Though would it be poss to only indenify certain coverage for certain fields that queried. i.e. using either of the following would cover the MTU settings for the interfaces. Further more if you filtered down the interfaces for certain nodes or interfaces on a node then the coverage would also represent that.

bf.q.interfaceProperties().answer().frame().MTU
bf.q.interfaceProperties(properties="MTU").answer().frame()

Thanks again,

[ratulm]

Field-level precision won't be possible in the short term. Batfish doesn't maintain that granularity.

But this should be possible, if you filtered using the nodes/interfaces parameters of the question.

Further more if you filtered down the interfaces for certain nodes or interfaces on a node then the coverage would also represent that.

@Ashlippers - does that sound right? doable for you?

[Xieyang Xu]

@rickdonato Hi Rick, we are glad to inform you that coverage support for interfaceProperties has now been added. Due to the limit of Batfish data model, the coverage of interfaces is now defined at interface level, not field level. It means an interface is covered when ANY of its field is queried.