[Xorp-hackers] Re: Prefix Lists

[Mike Horn]

I agree with Patrick and Kristian that it would be
better to have prefix lists that behave like Juniper,
this makes adding and deleting elements much easier.

-mike

--- xorp-hackers-request@icir.org wrote:

> Send Xorp-hackers mailing list submissions to
> 	xorp-hackers@icir.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
> visit
> 
>
http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
> 'help' to
> 	xorp-hackers-request@icir.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	xorp-hackers-admin@icir.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it
> is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Xorp-hackers digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Re: Config Var <-> Config mode ('Kristian
> Larsson')
>    2. AW: [Xorp-hackers] Config Var <-> Config mode
> (Patrick Preuss)
>    3. How to add UDP socket I/O to PIM (Mark Doll)
>    4. AW: [Xorp-users] Does xorp latest CVS have
> some problem with the export command? (Patrick
> Preuss)
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 21:00:51 +0100
> From: "'Kristian Larsson'" <kristian@juniks.net>
> To: Patrick Preuss <deathdealer@gmx.net>
> Cc: xorp-hackers@xorp.org
> Subject: Re: [Xorp-hackers] Config Var <-> Config
> mode
> 
> 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
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 2
> From: "Patrick Preuss" <deathdealer@gmx.net>
> To: "'Kristian Larsson'" <kristian@juniks.net>
> Cc: <xorp-hackers@xorp.org>
> Subject: AW: [Xorp-hackers] Config Var <-> Config
> mode
> Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 21:12:59 +0100
> 
> 
> Hello
> 
> > 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 :)
> 
> Blame me, have got the same though;)
> 
> >   Kristian
> 
> 
> > 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.
> 
> Who can I pay to do this for me. 
> 
> This is like the old access-list's on cisco
> 
> no access-list 101
> access-list 101 permit ....
> 
> 
=== message truncated ===


Mike Horn
Caddis Consulting
303.882.7910 cell