On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 08:13:28AM +0200, Matthew Whittaker-Williams wrote:
Hi,
I am having some issues with a filter of mine since my last upgrade to 1.3.2. Aug 6 00:00:04 bird: filters, line 72: AS path expected Aug 6 00:00:04 bird: filters, line 72: AS path expected
filter national int set asnums; { # Exceptions asnums = [ 286, 47377, 8514, 5430, 6848, 3300]; # Failes on this line below: if ( bgp_path.last ~ asnums) then { accept; } else { reject; } }
Changing it to : if bgp_path.last ~ [ 286, 47377, 8514, 5430, 6848, 3300 ] then { accept; }
Then its all fine, has the way on setting int changed?
The error 'AS path expected' is probably a result of applying the filter on a non-BGP route (which does not have bgp_path attribute and bgp_path.last expression fails). It is not related to int sets. So i would guess that it is some kind of coincidence with the upgrade and that syntax change. -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'SanTiago' Zajicek (email: santiago@crfreenet.org) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."