On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:40:48PM +0200, Edward Haas wrote:
What is the root level key? `routing`?
The root level is 'ipv4-routes' and 'ipv6-routes'. Try to save a layer for user to type comparing to ['routing']['routes']
ipv4 and ipv6 look identical to me here. It makes sense then to have `route` as the subtree and a `family` entry inside.
OK. And we could auto detect the family if user does not specify it when applying.
"next-hop-iface": "eth0", # Mandatory This is not mandatory on `iproute2`, it is usually resolved based on the address next hop.
Will remove the mandatory thing.
"ipv6-routes": [ # Sorted with 'table-id' then 'destination'
"protocol": "auto", # "static" or "auto"[1]
I prefer a more meaningful name, `auto` is problematic.
How about 'ipv6-ra' for router advertisement?
* For future source routing support, we could add top entry as
'route-rules' or other name to be decided.
routing-->rule will be nice.
Same reason above, save some typing.
What about adding or deleting an entry. Can we use `state` to express existence and absent? For cases where there are hundreds of routes, asking the user to specify all will not work well.
User could just remove the entry from what he/she got from `libnmstate.show()`. I don't know why that's hard for user. Can you elaborate the use case? Thank you very much. Best regards. -- Gris Ge
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature