[quagga-dev 16714] Re: IP Prefix-lists "ge" value

Paul Jakma paul at jakma.org
Mon Mar 5 22:18:36 GMT 2018


On Mon, 5 Mar 2018, Siva Kesava wrote:

>> Do people /use/ the "/X ge X le X" form (and why)?

> I was doing a conversion from general config language to Quagga language
> and was just outputting ge and le irrespective of them being equal to
> length so I was just curious why that would be an error even though
> documentation mentions it.

The reason will be to avoid the duplicate syntax for the same case, and 
avoid questions around whether or not to normalise.

We could change it, if it was common practice elsewhere to use ".../X ge 
X le X" (I can see an argument that that would reduce ambiguity, by 
being explicit about the range, and not relying on the implicit 
'exactness' of just "...X").

> Cisco config language has "eq" (equal) option also but Quagga does not
> require it.

'eq' might be useful too.

That that exists makes me think these more verbose forms are used for 
the explicitness reason above, and that the implicit exact-match perhaps 
is avoided by some (implicit behaviour is harder to remember).

> ‌Thanks
> Siva

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma | paul at jakma.org | @pjakma | Key ID: 0xD86BF79464A2FF6A
Fortune:
"There is hopeful symbolism in the fact that flags do not wave in a vacuum."
--Arthur C. Clarke


More information about the Quagga-dev mailing list