Replacing what is conventially thought to be a string with an integer multiplier seems a massive violation of the principle of least astonishment.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:00 AM, Jon Lewis <jle...@lewis.org> wrote: > On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, Giuliano Peritore wrote: > > The problem is that differently to Cisco the syntax of the prepend >> field on thius system is not a string (eg. "20912 20912 20912") but an >> integer, that the user interface _should_ limit to the interval 0-16. >> > ... > >> The producer has been warned about the problem, which I can't >> completely define as a "bug"... but the lack of a user configuration helper >> (syntax checker). >> > > More important than whether or not to consider this a bug, it seems a very > shortsighted way to support prepending. If your prepend "field" is an > integer controlling how many times to prepend, how do you control which > ASN(s) or even AS Paths are prepended? It sounds like you probably can't. > As has been discussed recently, there are cases where you might want to > prepend a creative AS Path for traffic engineering purposes to force certain > routes/paths to be ignored by certain ASNs. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Jon Lewis | I route > Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are > Atlantic Net | > _________ > http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp<http://www.lewis.org/%7Ejlewis/pgp>for PGP > public key_________ > >
