Page MenuHomeVyOS Platform

Discussion on changing BGP autonomous system number syntax
Closed, ResolvedPublicFEATURE REQUEST

Description

Heya everyone. Just wanted to have discussions on changing the leaf node of the BGP autonomous system number to more accurately reflect what it does.

Currently it looks like this:

[email protected]# set protocols bgp
   local-as     Autonomous System Number (ASN)

Per looking at it, and conversing with C-Po I believe it would be better if we change to:

[email protected]# set protocols bgp
   asn     Autonomous System Number (ASN)

or

[email protected]# set protocols bgp
   as-number     Autonomous System Number (ASN)

Really we can use anything, but I would like for us to go away from using "local-as" as it's a specific feature under neighbor creation that uses the same nomenclature.

Does this seem like a reasonable change?

Also, if maintainers deem it appropriate then I am completely ok with taking the task on myself and figuring it out and getting a PR out.

One consideration we might have to keep in mind is that from 1.3 to 1.4 there's already a change to the BGP AS number. Now within 1.4 there will be another change. I don't want to just make changes to existing nodes that are in place, but I feel this one specifically is needed just to help alleviate confusion between global AS number for the router, and local AS setting for a neighbor.

Thank you much :)

Details

Difficulty level
Easy (less than an hour)
Version
1.4
Why the issue appeared?
Will be filled on close
Is it a breaking change?
Config syntax change (migratable)
Issue type
Cosmetic issue (typos etc.)

Event Timeline

Cheeze_It triaged this task as Normal priority.
Cheeze_It changed Difficulty level from Unknown (require assessment) to Easy (less than an hour).
Cheeze_It changed Version from - to 1.4.

I would like to call it system-as(n)

c-po changed Is it a breaking change? from Perfectly compatible to Config syntax change (migratable).

@c-po, lets run with "system-as"

I figure that's fairly unambiguous.

I can work on it and do the submission. But eh, I'll likely be needing help with the config migration script. Should be fine otherwise though.

@dmbaturin, @syncer @erkin @UnicronNL @Viacheslav

I wanted to ask you guys if this is an appropriate change to make. Considering it's on BGP, it's going to be a change in a crucial part but I think this one is probably a good one to make just to reduce ambiguity.

Does this sound ok?