Martin Mares <mj@ucw.cz> writes:
I have also got a comment about export and import keywords. I don't think it is a good idea to call it this way. These keywords are a part of protocol statement, so "export" semantic is to export routes originating in this protocol to routing table - you call it "import". It is really confusing me.
Agreed. The problem is that the situation is completely symmetric, so any naming you choose has to be a bit confusing -- it's the same as defining left and right hand.
We have chosen "bird-centric" view, hence "export" means "export from bird to the outside world" and "import" the opposite.
So, you call protocols outside world? Did i understand correctly? I agree, that situation is quite symmetric, but when you are inside (protocol definition) then export means "go out of here" (to routing table). Your point of view is developer's. You see "core" routing table as a main part of bird. But as a user I see protocols as a main part of bird. This is certainly caused by configuration file, because there are not configuration commands for "core" routing table. PS: is that list who sends your letter to me and copy to the list, or is that you? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- David Rohleder davro@ics.muni.cz Institute of Computer Science, Masaryk University Brno, Czech Republic -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello!
So, you call protocols outside world? Did i understand correctly?
No, I call everything outside BIRD the "outside world".
Your point of view is developer's. You see "core" routing table as a main part of bird. But as a user I see protocols as a main part of bird.
No, my point of view is user's -- I see bird as a single entity and I don't look at its internals. By exporting I mean sending from bird to other routers via the protocol instance we're just configuring. No need to distinguish which part of bird is the "inside" and which is "outside" -- all parts are "inside". (If you omit several subtleties of where several route attributes originate, the "routing table vs. protocols" and "bird vs. rest of world" views are equivalent, so I have chosen the naming wrt. the latter model which is by far more obvious for the user.)
PS: is that list who sends your letter to me and copy to the list, or is that you?
It's me as I want my reply to reach both you and the list (and I was unsure whether you are subscribed in the list or not), but I thought the list is able to optimize out the extra copy which it doesn't seem to do (hmm, Yet Another Majordomo Patch to come :-) ). Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth There really exists a Microsoft product that doesn't suck -- unfortunately, it's a vacuum cleaner.
participants (2)
-
David Rohleder -
Martin Mares