[Xorp-hackers] show commands
Kristian Larsson
kristian@juniks.net
Sun, 23 Oct 2005 18:24:46 +0200
On Sun, Oct 23, 2005 at 08:29:35AM -0700, Pavlin Radoslavov wrote:
> > > The "show interfaces" command obtains the information from the FEA
> > > (to be more specific, from the module named "interface" that is
> > > inside the FEA), hence if the FEA is not running the "show interfaces"
> > > command won't be there. Practically all XORP modules depend
> > > (directly or indirectly) on the "interface" module inside the FEA so
> > > the "show interfaces" command should be almost always there. Only if
> > > you are running XORP with an empty configuration for example, then
> > > you won't see that command.
> > This makes sense however:
> > XORP> create fea
> > XORP> commit
> > XORP> exit
> > Xorp> show interfaces
> > Xorp>
> >
> > imho, "show interfaces" should list all interfaces
> > available on the system, not just the ones
> > configured. On systems such as FreeBSD where the
> > interfaces are named fxp,em,xl and so forth it
> > becomes a guess work to configure a interface.
> > I understand from a development perspective it's
> > much easier to just list the ones configured but I
> > really think this should be changed to include all
> > interfaces.
>
> I would argue that the existing "show interfaces" command should
> show only the interfaces that XORP knows about, but yes I agree that
> there should be a separate command to show all available interfaces
> on the system.
I would argue to the contrary, the "show interfaces"
should show all the interfaces on the system.
I imagine our different opinions spring from our
different use of XORP. I would use XORP mainly in
a production network where it makes sense to see
all interfaces. On the other hand in a lab setup
with click you may have dozens of interfaces and
showing all interfaces would only clutter the
output. I am also arguing that xorp should adept
the behaviour of other common router systems such
as IOS and JunOS, both which behave the way I
argue.
Compile-time option?
Perhaps a little flag saying if the interface has
been configured in XORP or not?
Anyone else care to comment? :)
>Please add this feature as a bugzilla entry.
There is already such a bug registerd - BG237.
Kristian.