Since we seem to have beaten the last topic to death, I'd like to
solicit the feedback of folks on the list to describe the
transactional capabilities of various equipment vendors.
One of the first things I look for in a vendor's configuration
interface is the ability to use transactions (2-phase or 3-phase
commits) to batch configuration statements.
The gold standard among equipment manufacturers I use is Juniper,
which supports 2-phase commits through its CLI and JunoScript (XML
over SSL) interfaces. With commit-check, you can even get a 3-phase
commit (config -> commit-check, [compare to other devices] ->
rollback/commit).
The major impediment to decent transactions seems to have been the
usage of "cisco-like" CLIs, and in particular the RapidLogic engine
for CLI design, so popular among startups, that has the capabilities
of Cisco IOS circa 1998. We've seen a number of devices using this
engine to get product to market quickly, and all report an inability
to usefully modify the interaction to support transactions. I'd love
to hear from anyone who has spoken recently to RapidLogic engineers as
to whether atomic commits are on their roadmap.
So, please respond with any equipment you know of, whether it supports
transactions, either on its CLI or through an API, or even with a
vendor-supplied NMS-system.
I'll start with equipment I've seen come through the lab:
Juniper JunOS: 2- and 3-phase commits on CLI and JunoScript
Tasman Networks: none
Alcatel 7750 SR: none on CLI; 3-phase transactions allegedly through
expensive NMS
Extreme: none
ANDA Etherrearch: menu-based; no transactions
Redback SMS: none
Cisco IOS: In some situations, the very intrusive use of configuration
archive could give you rollback. Yuk!
Thanks,
--kirby files
Follow-Ups:
|
|
