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

'Kristian Larsson' kristian@juniks.net
Wed, 2 Nov 2005 21:00:51 +0100


On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 08:47:03PM +0100, Patrick Preuss wrote:
> 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. 

I'm just saying that the parser shouldn't react
to ";". If we print them in our configuration file
is another matter.

Although having the parser ignore ";" you can't
write several "lines" on one line.. if you get my
drift :)

  Kristian
> 
> 
> 
> > 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.;-)
Indeed, "elements" is totally unnecessary,
everybodes knows a network list contains elements,
what else? ;)
And split up the lines!

Adding a single prefix to a 500 prefix list would
require you to rewrite the whole list in XORP. Not
very efficient.

> > I can't see anything other than programming
> > benefits to XORPs way.
> 
> > Am I the only one of this opinion?
> 
> Your not 
Sweet. I'm not alone :) 

   Kristian