[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