[quagga-dev 12584] Re: [PATCH v3 00/22] VRF support in quagga

Paul Jakma paul at jakma.org
Mon Jun 1 15:37:33 BST 2015

On Sun, 31 May 2015, David Lamparter wrote:

> As such, I'd mark the entire field as experimental (i.e. we won't care
> about API or CLI breakage for VRFs), and let the bright people on this
> list apply their engineering chops to it.  If some patchsets are badly
> engineered, we can point out those specific engineering issues at that
> occasion.

I'm not so sure.

Not so long ago we weren't even able to change the default of the 
link-state command to something that'd suit the overwhelming majority of 
users, because there might be some (likely small and transient set) of 
users with broken setups that might (incorrectly) depend on it.

If we put VRF in in a way that people start depending on aspects of this 
particular implementation (or can be argued is possible), my experience 
(not just from link-state, but other stuff) is that externally visible 
things can be difficult to change once in.

> For all we know, we can later chop off the variants that didn't end up 
> useful much.

Or we just design it right now.

I'm sure no bright engineer would object to having a design discussion, 
and ensuring that the proposal meets not just their own requirements but 
any wider requirements of the community. That's part of good engineering.

Paul Jakma	paul at jakma.org	@pjakma	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
What kind of sordid business are you on now?  I mean, man, whither
goest thou?  Whither goest thou, America, in thy shiny car in the night?
 		-- Jack Kerouac

More information about the Quagga-dev mailing list