Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Switch to using 'bgpq4' #53

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Switch to using 'bgpq4' #53

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

job
Copy link
Contributor

@job job commented Dec 31, 2019

The bgpq4 utility is an equivalent (but faster and better) replacement to bgpq3.

The `bgpq4` utility is an equivalent (but faster and better) replacement
to bgpq3.
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.02%) to 72.574% when pulling 72bed1e on job:bgpq4 into d31559b on pierky:master.

@eimann
Copy link

eimann commented Mar 1, 2020

Can I help with getting this PR merged? We are using bgpq4 since 0.22.2 and it's working like a charm. Unfortunately after every upgrade through pip we have to apply the patches for bgpq4 manually.

@pierky
Copy link
Owner

pierky commented Mar 3, 2020

Hello, thanks @job for the PR and @eimann for the feedback.
I'm working on this; I'll try to come up with a solution to keep backward compatibility, in order to not break the currently existing environments where bgpq3 is used today. Stay tuned ;)

@pierky
Copy link
Owner

pierky commented Mar 7, 2020

Hi @eimann, I pushed something to the dev branch, a new commit where I document the support of bgpq4.

I've noticed that since version 0.0.5, bgpq4 can deal with a set of CLI arguments which is fully backward compatible with bgpq3, at least for the options used by ARouteServer. A part from a cosmetic change in the error messages produced by my tool when bgpq fails, I couldn't spot any other relevant change needed to have it integrated with ARouteServer. Could you share which patch you need to apply in order to have it working properly? Maybe you are using bgpq4 0.0.4, which doesn't support the -3 argument that is passed by my tool?

From what you can see in the branch, my idea for the time being is to keep support of both bgpq3 and bgpq4: the way to deal with them is a bit of a hack, that is all the internal references and config lines are still named after bgpq3, with notes to make it clear that they can also be used to configure the tool for bgpq4, but this allows to easily keep backward compatibility with the existing ARouteServer deployments withouth touching the code too much.

The rational behind the intent of keeping support for both is that bgpq3 is still very commonly used on many systems, and also it's not a dead project (yeah, maybe not the most active one but still maintained).

I'll consider a better transition strategy in the future, or maybe a refactoring of the way to have the two programs both integrated in ARouteServer.

@pierky
Copy link
Owner

pierky commented Mar 14, 2020

Support for bgpq4 is now introduced with version 0.24.1. More details in my previous comments.

@pierky pierky closed this Mar 14, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants