AW: [Xorp-hackers] Config Var <-> Config mode

[Patrick Preuss]

Hello 

> How about removing ":" from the configuration file
> and simply ignoring ";" at the end of line. This
> would allow cut and paste with minimal changes.
> Plus it would be more JunOS like.

Yes removing : would be a good idea. 
But if it works under JunOS with ; we should have 
them in xorp to, it makes things easier, you see 
where the line / var ends. 



> One of the thing that networking people really
> love about Juniper is it's CLI, and thus making

Yes. 

> XORP very similar to it is clever. However there
> are several points where XORP differ from JunOS, IMHO
> this is often not to the better. The subject brought
> up here is one of them.

> Another is that of the "set" command which in XORP
> is split into create and set. Makes sense
> programming wise, not user wise. I know I have
> brought this up before:
Yes I have read it, think the Juniper way has some advantages, and 
the way of xorp to, some of the concepts in other routing platforms as
cisco, riverstone / Enterasys also. 
> JunOS:
> set prefix-list test 1.0.0.0/24
> set prefix-list test 2.0.0.0/24
> results in 
> prefix-list test {
>   1.0.0.0/24;
>   2.0.0.0/24;
> }

> XORP:
> create network4-list test elements 1.0.0.0/24,2.0.0.0/24
> results in
> network4-list {
>   elements: "1.0.0.0/24,1.0.1.0/24"
> }

> Which one is the easier one to scim through? Which
> one is easier to add prefixes to?

I think for reading and debugging the Juniper version is better to read. 
The Xorp way double things I think { and elemets: " means at this point the
same. For programming the xorp has it vantages, but who should it have
easier the programmer or the user network technican in this point, if you
have a huge network, round about 500 Sites, you will love all things witch
makes the daily tasks easier.;-)

> I can't see anything other than programming
> benefits to XORPs way.

> Am I the only one of this opinion?

Your not 

>   Kristian.

Patrick