perfect.

donald

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Lou Berger <[email protected]> wrote:

> how about:
>
> /* Utility function to get address family from current node.  */
> afi_t
> bgp_node_afi (struct vty *vty)
> {
>   afi_t afi;
>   switch (vty->node)
>     {
>     case BGP_IPV6_NODE:
>     case BGP_IPV6M_NODE:
>     case BGP_VPNV6_NODE:
>     case BGP_ENCAPV6_NODE:
>       afi = AFI_IP6;
>       break;
>     default:
>       afi = AFI_IP6;
>       break;
>     }
>   return afi;
> }
>
> /* Utility function to get subsequent address family from current
>    node.  */
> safi_t
> bgp_node_safi (struct vty *vty)
> {
>   safi_t safi;
>   switch (vty->node)
>     {
>     case BGP_ENCAP_NODE:
>     case BGP_ENCAPV6_NODE:
>       safi = SAFI_ENCAP;
>       break;
>     case BGP_VPNV4_NODE:
>     case BGP_VPNV6_NODE:
>       safi = SAFI_MPLS_VPN;
>       break;
>     case BGP_IPV4M_NODE:
>     case BGP_IPV6M_NODE:
>       safi = SAFI_MULTICAST;
>       break;
>     default:
>       safi = SAFI_UNICAST;
>       break;
>   }
>   return safi;
> }
>
>
> On 1/6/2016 8:52 AM, Donald Sharp wrote:
> > Then
> >
> > switch (vty->node)
> > {
> >  case ....:
> >  case ....:
> >   return AFI_IP6;
> >  default:
> >   return AFI_IP;
> > }
> >
> > donald
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Lou Berger <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >     Donald,
> >         Thanks for the review. See below.
> >
> >     On 1/6/2016 8:31 AM, Donald Sharp wrote:
> >     > Comments Inline....
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Lou Berger <[email protected]
> >     <mailto:[email protected]>
> >     > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
> >     >
> >     >     This is part of the core VPN and Encap SAFI changes.
> >     >
> >     >     diff --git a/bgpd/bgp_vty.c b/bgpd/bgp_vty.c
> >     >     index 5330a22..20aaec6 100644
> >     >     --- a/bgpd/bgp_vty.c
> >     >     +++ b/bgpd/bgp_vty.c
> >     >     @@ -56,8 +56,15 @@ extern struct in_addr router_id_zebra;
> >     >      afi_t
> >     >      bgp_node_afi (struct vty *vty)
> >     >      {
> >     >     -  if (vty->node == BGP_IPV6_NODE || vty->node ==
> >     BGP_IPV6M_NODE)
> >     >     -    return AFI_IP6;
> >     >     +  switch (vty->node)
> >     >     +    {
> >     >     +    case BGP_IPV6_NODE:
> >     >     +    case BGP_IPV6M_NODE:
> >     >     +    case BGP_VPNV6_NODE:
> >     >     +      return AFI_IP6;
> >     >     +      break;
> >     >     +    }
> >     >     +
> >     >        return AFI_IP;
> >     >      }
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > The return AFI_IP should be inside of the switch statement with the
> >     > correct cases.
> >     >
> >
> >     Why?  The current code basically = default to v4.
> >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >     @@ -66,6 +73,8 @@ bgp_node_afi (struct vty *vty)
> >     >      safi_t
> >     >      bgp_node_safi (struct vty *vty)
> >     >      {
> >     >     +  if (vty->node == BGP_VPNV6_NODE)
> >     >     +    return SAFI_MPLS_VPN;
> >     >        if (vty->node == BGP_VPNV4_NODE)
> >     >          return SAFI_MPLS_VPN;
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > Should this be a switch statement as well?
> >     >
> >
> >     Yes.  will update patch.
> >
> >     > Everything else looks good, though.
> >     >
> >     > donald
> >     Thanks,
> >     Lou
> >
> >
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Quagga-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev

Reply via email to