Version 2.0.0pre0

[Rasto Rickardt]

My note on this:

network people are used to do this interactively, this is possibly
reason guys from GoBGP are doing it the same way (only from CLI/API).

Netflow rules are not very persistent in nature, much less than usual
routes.

r.


> That is true, currently you can just define it in static protocol and
> receive or announce it by BGP.
> 
> I think that we should expand static protocol to allow adding or deleting
> routes interactively. There are some problematic behavioral details in
> it; e.g., how we should handle interactive removal of a route from
> configuration. Should we have two independent sets of routes, one
> added/removed by reconfiguration, one interactively? Or should we allow
> to remove interactively one from configuration? If so, should it respawn
> during reconfiguration?
>