Default (or core) makes sense to me... On March 30, 2018 11:28:02 AM Donald Sharp <sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
I would not say we would have a 'show ip route vrf default', although I suppose you could add that. `default` just means to me the main routing table. We need a way to signal that we want to do route leaking from the main routing table( static or through bgp ).
So in my mind the default keyword is just a special word used to say 'main routing table' for purposes of figuring out where we are trying to apply the command.
But I agree there is non-trivial amount of work needed to put this in.
donald
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 5:20 AM, Philippe Guibert <philippe.guibert@6wind.com> wrote:
Donald, Renato,
so "default" will be a VRF like the other ones. And it will be accessible in all show vrf <> commands. This is the goal of the change wished ?
I agree on the principle. However, some care will be needed: - when creating other VRF, since the keyword "default" will be reserved. - BGP uses the same keyword ( it is hardcoded in bgp_route.c . Some changes will be needed too.
Philippe
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:29 PM, Renato Westphal <renato@opensourcerouting.org> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Donald Sharp <sharpd@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
So currently if you want to specify the default vrf as a string you have to use:
Default-IP-Routing-Table
Do people have opinions on what to use? I am thinking of making the keyword `default` special in that it will allow lookup of the default vrf if entered.
thoughts?
I appreciate this idea.
`Default-IP-Routing-Table` is hard to type. A simple `default` is much more convenient and I don't see any downside on doing this change.
[]s
-- Renato Westphal
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@lists.frrouting.org https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@lists.frrouting.org https://lists.frrouting.org/listinfo/dev