Paul - I don't get this. 'no neighbor activate' does nothing more than temporarily turn the neighbor off, why would it remove some config? If I wanted to remove the neighbor, I would do a 'no neighbor X' instead, right?
donald On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Paul Jakma <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 2015, Vivek Venkatraman wrote: > > When a 'no neighbor activate' is done for a particular address-family, >> address-family specific configuration is reset/removed for the peer. I'm >> wondering if there is a real reason/need to do this. Is it because parts >> of >> the code may be processing against some of the AF-specific settings >> without >> checking if the AF is active for the peer? >> > > I think it's just a sensible principle of cleaning stuff up when it's not > being used. If it wasn't, then any 'neighbour ... activate' would depend on > state since startup, which might also be surprising. > > I guess you could add an option to the no neighbour ... activate command > to leave the config. > > regards, > -- > Paul Jakma [email protected] @pjakma Key ID: 64A2FF6A > Fortune: > You have the capacity to learn from mistakes. You'll learn a lot today. > > _______________________________________________ > Quagga-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev >
_______________________________________________ Quagga-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
