[NETPATH-366] Enrich dynamic network path with NPM domain cache

[pimlu]

What does this PR do?

This PR uses the DNS snooper as the first source of truth for network path tests.

Since the 1 minute TTL of the DNS snooper is shorter than the 5 minute query interval of a path test, the reverse DNS query is added as metadata to the test to avoid expiration issues.

Motivation

Data from the DNS snooper is preferable to reverse DNS, (if it is available) because it represents the actual DNS query the client made to get that IP.

Describe how you validated your changes

Run netpath collector test suite:
go test ./comp/networkpath/npcollector/npcollectorimpl

I plan to set up dynamic paths locally to test this before merging.

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Worth noting that the DNS snooper uses packet capture as opposed to eBPF, so these data sources could theoretically race (albeit unlikely because it runs within the 30s connection check). Would like someone to review the usage of ScheduleConns(conns.Conns, conns.Dns)

Additional Notes

[agent-platform-auto-pr]

Test changes on VM

Use this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM:

inv create-vm --pipeline-id=50270547 --os-family=ubuntu

Note: This applies to commit a6e2ed9

[cit-pr-commenter]

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 2332b764-bcc0-430f-886e-7f2204268c67

Baseline: be4b703
Comparison: a6e2ed9
Diff

Optimization Goals: ❌ Significant changes detected

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	trials	links
❌	pycheck_lots_of_tags	% cpu utilization	+6.49	[+2.84, +10.13]	1	Logs

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	trials	links
❌	pycheck_lots_of_tags	% cpu utilization	+6.49	[+2.84, +10.13]	1	Logs
➖	basic_py_check	% cpu utilization	+3.35	[-0.61, +7.30]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu	% cpu utilization	+0.88	[+0.14, +1.62]	1	Logs
➖	tcp_syslog_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	+0.54	[+0.49, +0.60]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.23	[-0.54, +1.00]	1	Logs
➖	tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude	ingress throughput	-0.00	[-0.01, +0.01]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api	ingress throughput	-0.00	[-0.11, +0.11]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.02	[-0.68, +0.65]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.02	[-0.65, +0.61]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.10	[-0.92, +0.71]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load	egress throughput	-0.10	[-0.57, +0.36]	1	Logs
➖	file_tree	memory utilization	-0.17	[-0.32, -0.01]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.19	[-0.97, +0.60]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_idle	memory utilization	-0.20	[-0.24, -0.15]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory utilization	-0.93	[-1.05, -0.80]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	otel_to_otel_logs	ingress throughput	-1.04	[-1.69, -0.40]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_logs	% cpu utilization	-1.94	[-4.87, +0.99]	1	Logs

Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed

perf	experiment	bounds_check_name	replicates_passed	links
❌	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	lost_bytes	9/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	quality_gate_idle	memory_usage	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory_usage	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	quality_gate_logs	memory_usage	10/10

Explanation

Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%

Performance changes are noted in the perf column of each table:

• ✅ = significantly better comparison variant performance
• ❌ = significantly worse comparison variant performance
• ➖ = no significant change in performance

A regression test is an A/B test of target performance in a repeatable rig, where "performance" is measured as "comparison variant minus baseline variant" for an optimization goal (e.g., ingress throughput). Due to intrinsic variability in measuring that goal, we can only estimate its mean value for each experiment; we report uncertainty in that value as a 90.00% confidence interval denoted "Δ mean % CI".

For each experiment, we decide whether a change in performance is a "regression" -- a change worth investigating further -- if all of the following criteria are true:

1. Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.

2. Its 90.00% confidence interval "Δ mean % CI" does not contain zero, indicating that if our statistical model is accurate, there is at least a 90.00% chance there is a difference in performance between baseline and comparison variants.

3. Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".

CI Pass/Fail Decision

✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.

• quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

[ken-schneider]

This looks great!

[AmitaiBl]

var reverseDNSHostname string