Mailing List Archive

Tom Beecher [beecher@beecher.cc] wrote:
> >
> > It should be a huge embarrasment to the designers. They survive on low
> > price and unique features. It would be quite amazing to have a CLI without
> > the nonsense.
> >
>
> That ship sailed years ago. Even though the legal precedent was set after
> Cisco vs Arista that CLI elements that are of common , standard usage
> aren't copyrightable, nobody wants to take the risk. So they come up with
> other ways that tend to be not good.
>

That's a terrible excuse for the shitty concepts behind MikroTik's CLI.

I'm not saying my stuff is much better, but yeah, actually I am.

Mike Hammett [nanog@ics-il.net] wrote:
> Most people I know don't even use the CLI. They use Winbox.
>

Which is also terrible.

I'd say it's probably the best router UI ever, but I suppose now we'll find ourselves in a religious argument.




-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP

----- Original Message -----

From: "Chris Cappuccio" <chris@nmedia.net>
To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org, "Mark Tinka" <mark@tinka.africa>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 4:44:13 PM
Subject: Re: Dodgy AS327933 ...?

Mike Hammett [nanog@ics-il.net] wrote:
> Most people I know don't even use the CLI. They use Winbox.
>

Which is also terrible.

Mike Hammett [nanog@ics-il.net] wrote:
> I'd say it's probably the best router UI ever, but I suppose now we'll find ourselves in a religious argument.
>

If that's truly how you feel, I would want to talk with you on Signal and get a better idea for what you like and don't like.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 6:30?PM Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:

> Most people I know don't even use the CLI. They use Winbox.
>
>
Actually, Winbox used to crash configuring BGP due to displaying full
routes if the router gets them.
So there is saying in Mikrotik communities to use CLI for BGP, while
keeping overall admin via Winbox.


Rubens

Mike Hammett wrote on 15/08/2023 23:02:
> I'd say it's probably the best router UI ever, but I suppose now we'll
> find ourselves in a religious argument.

Whatever about the web / winbox UI, there are some fairly serious
weaknesses in the cli and api:

1. there's no atomic configuration commit + auto rollback.
2. the CLI is non-idempotent, for example if you're in a list context
and issue the command "remove 1", it will do different things each time
you execute it.
3. there is no way to delete the configuration tree or sub-trees (e.g.
"config replace"), which outright blocks the possibility of clean-slate
reconfiguration.
4. as a consequence of #1 and #3, it's not possible to blindly change
the config on a routeros device without parsing the existing configuration.

The net outcome is that orchestration is basically impossible on this
platform, and it's not possible to fix. It would need a complete CLI/API
redesign.

Nick

On 8/16/23 00:28, Nick Hilliard wrote:

> Whatever about the web / winbox UI, there are some fairly serious
> weaknesses in the cli and api:
>
> 1. there's no atomic configuration commit + auto rollback.
> 2. the CLI is non-idempotent, for example if you're in a list context
> and issue the command "remove 1", it will do different things each
> time you execute it.
> 3. there is no way to delete the configuration tree or sub-trees (e.g.
> "config replace"), which outright blocks the possibility of
> clean-slate reconfiguration.
> 4. as a consequence of #1 and #3, it's not possible to blindly change
> the config on a routeros device without parsing the existing
> configuration.
>
> The net outcome is that orchestration is basically impossible on this
> platform, and it's not possible to fix. It would need a complete
> CLI/API redesign.

The detriment of the Mikrotik commercial model is also its success. I
often tell people that it's a "take it or leave it" kind of model.

They offer no roadmaps. They offer no bug-fix guarantees. They offer no
release date guarantees. They make promises not to provide any
guarantees. They just work at their own pace, and focus on what their
heart desires at the time.

But because of this model, they keep their software and appliances
extremely cheap, focus on what receives most attention from the wider
community in lieu of "big customers", and in the end, deliver a product
that packs a lot of features in a 12MB-sized OS that most of its
followers are able to use to run a service provider network.

The inconveniences of the CLI and/or Winbox are just that to their
followers... inconveniences. They hurt, but not enough to force them to
consider more traditional vendors. Kind of like the dog that sits on the
nail continuously whining about the pain, but can't seem to get up from
under the nail to free itself of the anguish.

Mikrotik aren't going anywhere, because their followers are content with
the model. If operators that run traditional vendor gear continue to
allow BGP sessions to form with Mikrotik routers, this problem will not
go away. I am not stating that non-Mikrotik equipment block Mikrotik BGP
sessions; I'm just saying Mikrotik currently have no incentive to put
better code out on to the Internet.

Mark.

>
> That's a terrible excuse for the shitty concepts behind MikroTik's CLI.
>

Fear of being sued into oblivion by a massive corporation, even if they're
in the wrong, has influenced many choices in technology.

To be clear, I am not stating that Mikrotik made the CLI choices they did
BECAUSE of that concern. I have no knowledge there. I do know that Much
Larger Vendors have absolutely made tradeoffs because they didn't want to
deal with legal actions from Another Large Vendor or Patent Troll, so it's
not exactly uncommon.

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 5:43?PM Chris Cappuccio <chris@nmedia.net> wrote:

> Tom Beecher [beecher@beecher.cc] wrote:
> > >
> > > It should be a huge embarrasment to the designers. They survive on low
> > > price and unique features. It would be quite amazing to have a CLI
> without
> > > the nonsense.
> > >
> >
> > That ship sailed years ago. Even though the legal precedent was set after
> > Cisco vs Arista that CLI elements that are of common , standard usage
> > aren't copyrightable, nobody wants to take the risk. So they come up with
> > other ways that tend to be not good.
> >
>
> That's a terrible excuse for the shitty concepts behind MikroTik's CLI.
>
> I'm not saying my stuff is much better, but yeah, actually I am.
>