Mailing List Archive

+1 Mark!

As any good problem begs for a solution, my suggestions to JNPR are as follows, as alternative places for this command:

"show route transport-class ..." (or really, is it even a routing thing? might be better w/the segment-routing or spring commands)i.e.:
"show segment-routing ..."
"show spring transport-class ....."

...but whatever is done, please, for the love of 20+ years of finger-memory.... please do NOT make it conflict with "sh[TAB] rou[TAB]"

- CK.

(P.S. NOTE that since this new 'show' command is part of base JunOS 21 and above; it's also present on all EX, QFX, SRX, etc.. devices you would never ever think of ever running segment-routing on w/transport classes or colours, but that *do* have a basic routing table, so it's not just on PTX/ACX/EVO or MX/P/PE devices we run into this...)




> On Jul 12, 2023, at 18:49, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> So, this is going to be a very priviledged post, and I have been spending the last several months mulling over even complaining about it either on here, or with my SE.
>
> But a community friend sent me the exact same annoyance he is having with Junos 21 or later, which has given me a final reason to just go ahead and moan about it:
>
> tinka@router> show rout
> ^
> 'rout' is ambiguous.
> Possible completions:
> route Show routing table information
> routing Show routing information
> {master}
> tinka@router>
>
> I'm going to send this to my Juniper SE and AM. Not sure what they'll make of it, as it is a rather priviledged complaint - but in truth, it does make working with Junos on a fairly historically commonly used command rather cumbersome, and annoying.
>
> The smile that comes to my face when I touch a box running Junos 20 or earlier and run this specific command, is unconscionably satisfying :-).
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 7/12/23 11:12, Chris Kawchuk wrote:

> +1 Mark!

For transparency, it was Chris who gave me the nudge, so thanks for
that, mate :-).


> As any good problem begs for a solution, my suggestions to JNPR are as follows, as alternative places for this command:
>
> "show route transport-class ..." (or really, is it even a routing thing? might be better w/the segment-routing or spring commands)i.e.:
> "show segment-routing ..."
> "show spring transport-class ....."
>
> ...but whatever is done, please, for the love of 20+ years of finger-memory.... please do NOT make it conflict with "sh[TAB] rou[TAB]"

The other option that came to mind is - they could make it part of the
BGP or MPLS command set, as it is specific to those features.


> - CK.
>
> (P.S. NOTE that since this new 'show' command is part of base JunOS 21 and above; it's also present on all EX, QFX, SRX, etc.. devices you would never ever think of ever running segment-routing on w/transport classes or colours, but that *do* have a basic routing table, so it's not just on PTX/ACX/EVO or MX/P/PE devices we run into this...)

The beauty of "One Junos to rule them all" :-).

Mark.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

You can probably deny that command using the login class ACL.

--
Vladimir Blazhkun (via iPhone).

> On 12 Jul 2023, at 11:49, Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> ?So, this is going to be a very priviledged post, and I have been spending the last several months mulling over even complaining about it either on here, or with my SE.
>
> But a community friend sent me the exact same annoyance he is having with Junos 21 or later, which has given me a final reason to just go ahead and moan about it:
>
> tinka@router> show rout
> ^
> 'rout' is ambiguous.
> Possible completions:
> route Show routing table information
> routing Show routing information
> {master}
> tinka@router>
>
> I'm going to send this to my Juniper SE and AM. Not sure what they'll make of it, as it is a rather priviledged complaint - but in truth, it does make working with Junos on a fairly historically commonly used command rather cumbersome, and annoying.
>
> The smile that comes to my face when I touch a box running Junos 20 or earlier and run this specific command, is unconscionably satisfying :-).
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Another offender in 21. `protocols bgp` doesn't autocomplete as it did
since `bgpmcast` was added.

me@r-mx304-lab-re1# set protocols bgp?
Possible completions:
> bgp BGP options
> bgpmcast BGP multicast options


https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/multicast/topics/ref/statement/bgpmcast.html
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

You don't need to tell my fingers that. __

With the infrastructure as it is, the only "solution" is we stop adding things. Good luck with that.

The general here is the explosion of keywords. I have about 15 features sitting in my backlog that are small things to do to bgp policy. The policy stanza is already a mess.

... and that's not including the work to let users match on flowspec filter components.

The CLI could be taught to not include certain auto-completions as a user-profile, locally, with hints from TACACS, etc... but it means we get into an inconsistent user experience.

Feel free to spend some collective thinking time on what a "this would suck less" solution would look like. I suspect that the competing opinions on what to do will eventually involve a cage fight match.

-- Jeff


?On 7/12/23, 9:39 AM, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Chris Wopat via juniper-nsp" <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net <mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> on behalf of juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>> wrote:


[External Email. Be cautious of content]




Another offender in 21. `protocols bgp` doesn't autocomplete as it did
since `bgpmcast` was added.


me@r-mx304-lab-re1# set protocols bgp?
Possible completions:
> bgp BGP options
> bgpmcast BGP multicast options




https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/multicast/topics/ref/statement/bgpmcast.html <https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/multicast/topics/ref/statement/bgpmcast.html>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GRWZYDw9dknfYLkcYhOG-D5DqdTOx4pztouooXch-W7lRlj5lUC_M0CkQf0rZBK0JIiXkU_l-ETb8ikzbZEKXVg$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GRWZYDw9dknfYLkcYhOG-D5DqdTOx4pztouooXch-W7lRlj5lUC_M0CkQf0rZBK0JIiXkU_l-ETb8ikzbZEKXVg$>




Juniper Business Use Only
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 7/12/23 15:08, Vladimir Blazhkun wrote:

> You can probably deny that command using the login class ACL.

As I'd mentioned to someone else already, not looking to create custom
hacks that would not survive staff movement.

While it is an option, it would be one of extreme last resort.

Mark.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 7/12/23 15:38, Chris Wopat wrote:

> Another offender in 21. `protocols bgp` doesn't autocomplete as it did
> since `bgpmcast` was added.
>
> me@r-mx304-lab-re1# set protocols bgp?
> Possible completions:
> > bgp                  BGP options
> > bgpmcast             BGP multicast options

Yes, that has been painful too since Junos 21. But in the hierarchy of
annoying changes, the one to "route" is higher.

Mark.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 7/12/23 15:45, Jeff Haas wrote:

> You don't need to tell my fingers that. __
>
> With the infrastructure as it is, the only "solution" is we stop adding things. Good luck with that.
>
> The general here is the explosion of keywords. I have about 15 features sitting in my backlog that are small things to do to bgp policy. The policy stanza is already a mess.
>
> ... and that's not including the work to let users match on flowspec filter components.
>
> The CLI could be taught to not include certain auto-completions as a user-profile, locally, with hints from TACACS, etc... but it means we get into an inconsistent user experience.
>
> Feel free to spend some collective thinking time on what a "this would suck less" solution would look like. I suspect that the competing opinions on what to do will eventually involve a cage fight match.

Will any of these issues register significantly on Juniper's roadmap of
how to make customers happier? Likely unlikely.

Will it stop customers from buying Juniper gear. Even more likely unlikely.

Does it hurt to ask? Nope.

Mark.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

?On 7/12/23, 11:46 AM, "Mark Tinka" <mark@tinka.afri <mailto:mark@tinka.afri>ca> wrote:
> Will any of these issues register significantly on Juniper's roadmap of
> how to make customers happier? Likely unlikely.

Cynically, money moves things the best.

But these comments don't fall on deaf ears. Occasionally, they fall on ears that just solve the problem. Sadly, for this one, that's not in my power to unilaterally address.

Minimally, this has prodded a conversation about "why wasn't this considered during our process reviews?"

-- Jeff


Juniper Business Use Only
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Hi Mark,
100% agree if it could help.
Very annoying. If UX designer touched it, he or she probably never
actually worked with Junos.

Kind regards,
Andrey

Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp ?????(?) 2023-07-12 04:49:
> So, this is going to be a very priviledged post, and I have been
> spending the last several months mulling over even complaining about
> it either on here, or with my SE.
>
> But a community friend sent me the exact same annoyance he is having
> with Junos 21 or later, which has given me a final reason to just go
> ahead and moan about it:
>
> tinka@router> show rout
>                                  ^
> 'rout' is ambiguous.
> Possible completions:
>   route                Show routing table information
>   routing              Show routing information
> {master}
> tinka@router>
>
> I'm going to send this to my Juniper SE and AM. Not sure what they'll
> make of it, as it is a rather priviledged complaint - but in truth, it
> does make working with Junos on a fairly historically commonly used
> command rather cumbersome, and annoying.
>
> The smile that comes to my face when I touch a box running Junos 20 or
> earlier and run this specific command, is unconscionably satisfying
> :-).
>
> Mark.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

I find it kind of telling that customers are just getting around to
complaining about it two years after it was released. Not at all
surprising, but illustrates how slow network operators update cycles can be
compared to the pace of development.

To the Junos developers, this is ancient news, long forgotten in the dozens
of sprints and multiple releases since.


On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 2:13 PM Andrey Kostin via juniper-nsp <
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:

> Hi Mark,
> 100% agree if it could help.
> Very annoying. If UX designer touched it, he or she probably never
> actually worked with Junos.
>
> Kind regards,
> Andrey
>
> Mark Tinka via juniper-nsp ?????(?) 2023-07-12 04:49:
> > So, this is going to be a very priviledged post, and I have been
> > spending the last several months mulling over even complaining about
> > it either on here, or with my SE.
> >
> > But a community friend sent me the exact same annoyance he is having
> > with Junos 21 or later, which has given me a final reason to just go
> > ahead and moan about it:
> >
> > tinka@router> show rout
> > ^
> > 'rout' is ambiguous.
> > Possible completions:
> > route Show routing table information
> > routing Show routing information
> > {master}
> > tinka@router>
> >
> > I'm going to send this to my Juniper SE and AM. Not sure what they'll
> > make of it, as it is a rather priviledged complaint - but in truth, it
> > does make working with Junos on a fairly historically commonly used
> > command rather cumbersome, and annoying.
> >
> > The smile that comes to my face when I touch a box running Junos 20 or
> > earlier and run this specific command, is unconscionably satisfying
> > :-).
> >
> > Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 7/15/23 20:54, Crist Clark wrote:

> I find it kind of telling that customers are just getting around to
> complaining about it two years after it was released. Not at all
> surprising, but illustrates how slow network operators update cycles
> can be compared to the pace of development.
>
> To the Junos developers, this is ancient news, long forgotten in the
> dozens of sprints and multiple releases since.

While I do take your point, to be fair, this is one of those things
operators are not likely to complain about because it would be coming
from a place of priviledge. There are far more pressing issues than
this, to be honest.

So like us who have been running Junos 21 for the past 8 or so months,
we've been struggling with this and have been meaning to bring it up.
But it's not a major catastrophe, so we haven't prioritized - and this
post is really tongue-in-cheek. If it gets looked at, great. If it
doesn't, it's not the end of the world.

If you run a network of significant size, you are going to be in a
constant cycle of code upgrades. So it's not unreasonable to find
operators being behind.

Mark.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Indeed. And as you’re alluding to and most probably already know this — yeah most of us end up settling on “some release train” for a while, after we spend 3-4 months testing it thoroughly in the Lab... then spend 18 months getting everything in the network “up to that release”. With hundreds of beefy devices spread across the globe, and having to do customer notifications to each and every service, (and get them to also agree on the time that we’re doing it.. some of my customers have a LOT of weight, and can say ’no’), it does take quite a while to get through it all.

And yup - by that time, 2+ years has gone past, and it’s time to do it all over again. Lather, rinse, repeat. ;)

FWIW — The last one I personally did testing on for our LAB and production network was 20.4Rx-Sxx (EEOL version)….. so yeah, we started running into this new “sh[tab] rou[tab]” command in the Lab in the last few months as we started our tests on 21.4 and 22.4 (the next EEOL candidates for a global rollout)

It is what it is. ;)

My hope is that it’s ‘not too late’ to fix this slightly-annoying UI/UX experience and this can be pulled back from the jaws of defeat before it gets entrenched too far. as Mark said, If it gets looked at, great. If it doesn't, it's not the end of the world; but if we, as customers, don’t provide useful and constructive feedback to Juniper (something they’re asking fro with their outreach programmes, the Elevate community, the Juniper circle, etc..) then it has a 100% chance of never getting looked at.

- CK.


FWIW — The contrarian position would be if I were to simply just blindly install “oh hey, theres a new JunOS” every 3-4 months, and we get a nasty VPLS bug, or an eVPN bug, or an HQoS Bug, or an ISIS/SR bug which causes an outage/customer issue, I’d quickly find myself with a pink slip. ;)



> On 16 Jul 2023, at 4:54 am, Crist Clark via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> I find it kind of telling that customers are just getting around to
> complaining about it two years after it was released. Not at all
> surprising, but illustrates how slow network operators update cycles can be
> compared to the pace of development.
>
> To the Junos developers, this is ancient news, long forgotten in the dozens
> of sprints and multiple releases since.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 16/07/2023 00:51, C K via juniper-nsp wrote:

> Indeed. And as you’re alluding to and most probably already know this — yeah most of us end up settling on “some release train” for a while, after we spend 3-4 months testing it thoroughly in the Lab... then spend 18 months getting everything in the network “up to that release”. With hundreds of beefy devices spread across the globe, and having to do customer notifications to each and every service, (and get them to also agree on the time that we’re doing it.. some of my customers have a LOT of weight, and can say ’no’), it does take quite a while to get through it all.
>
> And yup - by that time, 2+ years has gone past, and it’s time to do it all over again. Lather, rinse, repeat. ;)

You missed the fun part where you have to explain *again* every few
months to the CISO and their minions why you can't adhere to the
written-by/for-Windows-admins "Patching Policy" that says everything in
the company is upgraded to "the latest release" within 14 days, no
software version is ever "more than three months old", and similar
messages of joy ;)

Cheers,
Tim.


_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On Sun, 16 Jul 2023 at 19:47, Tim Franklin via juniper-nsp
<juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:


> You missed the fun part where you have to explain *again* every few
> months to the CISO and their minions why you can't adhere to the
> written-by/for-Windows-admins "Patching Policy" that says everything in
> the company is upgraded to "the latest release" within 14 days, no
> software version is ever "more than three months old", and similar
> messages of joy ;)

What is the explanation? Is the explanation that NOS are closed source
software with proprietary or difficult to integrate hardware. And that
revenue comes from support contracts, which creates moral hazard,
which does not suggest intent in outcome, but suggests bias in organic
outcome towards bad software.

--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Juniper Business Use Only
On 7/12/23, 12:11 PM, "Jeff Haas" <jhaas@juniper.net <mailto:jhaas@juniper.net>> wrote:
> On 7/12/23, 11:46 AM, "Mark Tinka" <mark@tinka.afri <mailto:mark@tinka.afri> <mailto:mark@tinka.afri <mailto:mark@tinka.afri>>ca> wrote:
> > Will any of these issues register significantly on Juniper's roadmap of
> > how to make customers happier? Likely unlikely.
>
> Cynically, money moves things the best.
>
> But these comments don't fall on deaf ears. Occasionally, they fall on ears that just solve the problem. Sadly, for this one, that's not in my power to unilaterally address.

Apparently not unilaterally.

I am in need of someone with a current support contract to open a customer
issue on the "show routing" collision and push for that issue to generate an
internal PR. Please unicast me the case#s.

No promises though.

-- Jeff

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Hi Jeff

I'll open it with my SE here in Australia (Mark Barrett). Will advise once complete.

- CK.


> On Jul 19, 2023, at 01:24, Jeff Haas via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
> On 7/12/23, 12:11 PM, "Jeff Haas" <jhaas@juniper.net <mailto:jhaas@juniper.net>> wrote:
>> On 7/12/23, 11:46 AM, "Mark Tinka" <mark@tinka.afri <mailto:mark@tinka.afri> <mailto:mark@tinka.afri <mailto:mark@tinka.afri>>ca> wrote:
>>> Will any of these issues register significantly on Juniper's roadmap of
>>> how to make customers happier? Likely unlikely.
>>
>> Cynically, money moves things the best.
>>
>> But these comments don't fall on deaf ears. Occasionally, they fall on ears that just solve the problem. Sadly, for this one, that's not in my power to unilaterally address.
>
> Apparently not unilaterally.
>
> I am in need of someone with a current support contract to open a customer
> issue on the "show routing" collision and push for that issue to generate an
> internal PR. Please unicast me the case#s.
>
> No promises though.
>
> -- Jeff
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 7/19/23 02:37, Chris Kawchuk wrote:

> Hi Jeff
>
> I'll open it with my SE here in Australia (Mark Barrett). Will advise once complete.

I'm trying with my SE too. Let's stay in touch.

Mark.
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Hi Jeff,

Any chance the CLI could make use of repeated presses of the TAB key to
cycle through the completion options ?

For instance in the newer 21.x release for EX switches I note a
"synchronous-ethernet" option under the show level, and my muscle memory
for "show system" was reduced down to "show sy" - so could the CLI say show
the "sy is ambiguous" option upon the first TAB press, but when you press
TAB again it then autocompletes "synchronous-ethernet" and another TAB
press to autocomplete "system" ?

^
'sy' is ambiguous.
Possible completions:
synchronous-ethernet Show synchronous ethernet related information
system Show system information
{master:0}

Regards,
Chris

On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 11:45?PM Jeff Haas via juniper-nsp <
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:

> You don't need to tell my fingers that. __
>
> With the infrastructure as it is, the only "solution" is we stop adding
> things. Good luck with that.
>
> The general here is the explosion of keywords. I have about 15 features
> sitting in my backlog that are small things to do to bgp policy. The
> policy stanza is already a mess.
>
> ... and that's not including the work to let users match on flowspec
> filter components.
>
> The CLI could be taught to not include certain auto-completions as a
> user-profile, locally, with hints from TACACS, etc... but it means we get
> into an inconsistent user experience.
>
> Feel free to spend some collective thinking time on what a "this would
> suck less" solution would look like. I suspect that the competing opinions
> on what to do will eventually involve a cage fight match.
>
> -- Jeff
>
>
> ?On 7/12/23, 9:39 AM, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Chris Wopat via
> juniper-nsp" <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net <mailto:
> juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> on behalf of
> juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>> wrote:
>
>
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
>
>
>
>
> Another offender in 21. `protocols bgp` doesn't autocomplete as it did
> since `bgpmcast` was added.
>
>
> me@r-mx304-lab-re1# set protocols bgp?
> Possible completions:
> > bgp BGP options
> > bgpmcast BGP multicast options
>
>
>
>
>
> https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/multicast/topics/ref/statement/bgpmcast.html
> <
> https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/multicast/topics/ref/statement/bgpmcast.html
> >
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <mailto:
> juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GRWZYDw9dknfYLkcYhOG-D5DqdTOx4pztouooXch-W7lRlj5lUC_M0CkQf0rZBK0JIiXkU_l-ETb8ikzbZEKXVg$
> <
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GRWZYDw9dknfYLkcYhOG-D5DqdTOx4pztouooXch-W7lRlj5lUC_M0CkQf0rZBK0JIiXkU_l-ETb8ikzbZEKXVg$
> >
>
>
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On 7/19/23 06:22, Mark Tinka wrote:

> I'm trying with my SE too. Let's stay in touch.

Got a ticket opened with JTAC which my SE upstreamed, and it has been
linked to an internal PR that was raised on the back of Chris' ticket.

So all we can do now is wait.

Thanks, all.

Mark.

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

On July 26, 2023 7:15:55 PM PDT, Chris Lee via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>Hi Jeff,
>
>Any chance the CLI could make use of repeated presses of the TAB key to
>cycle through the completion options ?
>
>For instance in the newer 21.x release for EX switches I note a
>"synchronous-ethernet" option under the show level, and my muscle memory
>for "show system" was reduced down to "show sy" - so could the CLI say show
>the "sy is ambiguous" option upon the first TAB press, but when you press
>TAB again it then autocompletes "synchronous-ethernet" and another TAB
>press to autocomplete "system" ?
>
>root> show sy
> ^
>'sy' is ambiguous.
>Possible completions:
> synchronous-ethernet Show synchronous ethernet related information
> system Show system information
>{master:0}
>root>
>
>Regards,
>Chris
>
>On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 11:45?PM Jeff Haas via juniper-nsp <
>juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>> You don't need to tell my fingers that. __
>>
>> With the infrastructure as it is, the only "solution" is we stop adding
>> things. Good luck with that.
>>
>> The general here is the explosion of keywords. I have about 15 features
>> sitting in my backlog that are small things to do to bgp policy. The
>> policy stanza is already a mess.
>>
>> ... and that's not including the work to let users match on flowspec
>> filter components.
>>
>> The CLI could be taught to not include certain auto-completions as a
>> user-profile, locally, with hints from TACACS, etc... but it means we get
>> into an inconsistent user experience.
>>
>> Feel free to spend some collective thinking time on what a "this would
>> suck less" solution would look like. I suspect that the competing opinions
>> on what to do will eventually involve a cage fight match.
>>
>> -- Jeff
>>
>>
>> ?On 7/12/23, 9:39 AM, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Chris Wopat via
>> juniper-nsp" <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net <mailto:
>> juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> on behalf of
>> juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Another offender in 21. `protocols bgp` doesn't autocomplete as it did
>> since `bgpmcast` was added.
>>
>>
>> me@r-mx304-lab-re1# set protocols bgp?
>> Possible completions:
>> > bgp BGP options
>> > bgpmcast BGP multicast options
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/multicast/topics/ref/statement/bgpmcast.html
>> <
>> https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/multicast/topics/ref/statement/bgpmcast.html
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net <mailto:
>> juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
>>
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GRWZYDw9dknfYLkcYhOG-D5DqdTOx4pztouooXch-W7lRlj5lUC_M0CkQf0rZBK0JIiXkU_l-ETb8ikzbZEKXVg$
>> <
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GRWZYDw9dknfYLkcYhOG-D5DqdTOx4pztouooXch-W7lRlj5lUC_M0CkQf0rZBK0JIiXkU_l-ETb8ikzbZEKXVg$
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Juniper Business Use Only
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>
>_______________________________________________
>juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

I love this proposal. I would also love it if shift-tab would cycle backwards.
--
Typo'ed on a glorified Speak&Spell...
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Chris,

The point was raised internally as part of this discussion. No clue what our manageability folk think about the difficulty to implement this.

That said for the rest of the thread, thanks for ensuring we get some customer PRs in the system for the originally reported issue. I’m hoping for good news to pass along in the near future.

-- Jeff




Juniper Business Use Only
From: Chris Lee <chris@datachaos.com.au>
Date: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 10:16 PM
To: Jeff Haas <jhaas@juniper.net>, "juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net" <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Junos 21+ Killing Finger Muscle Memory...

[External Email. Be cautious of content]

Hi Jeff,

Any chance the CLI could make use of repeated presses of the TAB key to cycle through the completion options ?

For instance in the newer 21.x release for EX switches I note a "synchronous-ethernet" option under the show level, and my muscle memory for "show system" was reduced down to "show sy" - so could the CLI say show the "sy is ambiguous" option upon the first TAB press, but when you press TAB again it then autocompletes "synchronous-ethernet" and another TAB press to autocomplete "system" ?

^
'sy' is ambiguous.
Possible completions:
synchronous-ethernet Show synchronous ethernet related information
system Show system information
{master:0}

Regards,
Chris

On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 11:45?PM Jeff Haas via juniper-nsp <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>> wrote:
You don't need to tell my fingers that. __

With the infrastructure as it is, the only "solution" is we stop adding things. Good luck with that.

The general here is the explosion of keywords. I have about 15 features sitting in my backlog that are small things to do to bgp policy. The policy stanza is already a mess.

... and that's not including the work to let users match on flowspec filter components.

The CLI could be taught to not include certain auto-completions as a user-profile, locally, with hints from TACACS, etc... but it means we get into an inconsistent user experience.

Feel free to spend some collective thinking time on what a "this would suck less" solution would look like. I suspect that the competing opinions on what to do will eventually involve a cage fight match.

-- Jeff


On 7/12/23, 9:39 AM, "juniper-nsp on behalf of Chris Wopat via juniper-nsp" <juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net> <mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net>> on behalf of juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> <mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>>> wrote:


[External Email. Be cautious of content]




Another offender in 21. `protocols bgp` doesn't autocomplete as it did
since `bgpmcast` was added.


me@r-mx304-lab-re1# set protocols bgp?
Possible completions:
> bgp BGP options
> bgpmcast BGP multicast options




https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/multicast/topics/ref/statement/bgpmcast.html <https://www.juniper.net/documentation/us/en/software/junos/multicast/topics/ref/statement/bgpmcast.html>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net> <mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GRWZYDw9dknfYLkcYhOG-D5DqdTOx4pztouooXch-W7lRlj5lUC_M0CkQf0rZBK0JIiXkU_l-ETb8ikzbZEKXVg$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GRWZYDw9dknfYLkcYhOG-D5DqdTOx4pztouooXch-W7lRlj5lUC_M0CkQf0rZBK0JIiXkU_l-ETb8ikzbZEKXVg$> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GRWZYDw9dknfYLkcYhOG-D5DqdTOx4pztouooXch-W7lRlj5lUC_M0CkQf0rZBK0JIiXkU_l-ETb8ikzbZEKXVg$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!GRWZYDw9dknfYLkcYhOG-D5DqdTOx4pztouooXch-W7lRlj5lUC_M0CkQf0rZBK0JIiXkU_l-ETb8ikzbZEKXVg$>>




Juniper Business Use Only
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!H_Mzg5Dsl-LClWOn2Hf7PEvfnmCaJBbS22AsK8jAMErwIu9icUXgXw38H6awbx1AmZmraooHJ5EiEkVn$>
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp