[Xorp-hackers] [Xorp-users] Policy network4 operator
Pavlin Radoslavov
pavlin at icir.org
Tue Nov 21 12:42:24 PST 2006
> I would also prefer changing to Juniper-like keywords. For me,
> the operators I care about are "exact", "longer", "orlonger" and
> "not". I can't think of a practical application for "shorter" or
> "orshorter".
The "shorter" and "orshorter" keywords could be useful if someone
wants to write a policy statement that matches all routes that might
be used to reach a particular destination. I don't know whether
someone will use it in practice, but it can be useful for
experimentations.
In any case, there shouldn't be any harm having them.
> Btw, can you share your thoughts on what the "long-term" solution
> would look like?
The long-term solution will be determined at some future stage.
Few things that come to mind (within the context of the discussed
network operators) are:
* Some of the syntax can be more Juniper-like. E.g.,
network 10.0.0.0/8 orlonger
network 10.0.0.0/8 through 10.1.0.0/16
* Better support for network lists. E.g.,
network-list foo {
10.0.0.0/8 orlonger
10.0.0.0/8 through 10.1.0.0/16
}
If you have ideas or suggestions about any long-term modifications
(not only about the network operator but policy in general), please
create a new bugzilla entry that can be used as a placeholder for
them. FYI, there is already an entry about Cisco RPL:
http://www.xorp.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=652
Pavlin
More information about the Xorp-hackers
mailing list