%commands vs. @commands

Andrew Partan asp at partan.com
Wed Jun 8 16:39:30 UTC 2005

On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 11:23:20AM -0400, Ed Ravin wrote:
> On the larger issue of pruning out commands, note my previous (unanswered)
> query to the list about running both "show running-config" and "write term".
> RANCID's philosophy seems to be "send all commands, let RANCID sort 'em out
> afterwards".

Yup; we try to support a large number of routers running many
versions of code with a small number of programs.  E.g.: all junipers
are supported by jlogin/jrancid, even if this means that some routers
are sent commands that they don't support and if we are sending
commands that only work in older code.  Another e.g.: clogin is
used for ciscos & a number of non-cisco routers.

It pains me to have some ciscos supported by rancid/clogin and other
ciscos by cat5rancid/clogin.  At least both types use clogin.

The ideal would be to have one login program and one rancid program
& put the smarts into the program to figure out what its talking

As it is, we currently have 12 *login programs and 23 *rancid
programs; most of which share a fair amount of code.  Trying to
keep them in sync & trying to make sure that changes that works on
one doesn't blow up another is a pain.

I'd much rather send 100 useless commands to a router than expand
the number of *login & *rancid programs we have, trying to taylor
each one to a particular type of router running a particular version
of code.

I think Heas' comment of working on the configurable rancid is the
way to go - fewer commands for us humans to remember; more smarts
in the code.

More information about the Rancid-discuss mailing list