-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
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
Configuration without groups #43
Comments
This approach simplifies the implementation of the terraform providers by taking advantage of the JUNOS apply-groups feature. In order to implement a different approach we would have to parse the YANG schema locally and perform an XML merge locally. This is a significant effort but we may have to do it this way for efficiency reasons. For now, you can see the resulting config by using the command: |
This is actually something we have done internally by forking and modifying this generator. I am just trying to find cycles to contribute everything else up stream here. I have also moved everything to a pure go implementation from a generation aspect and making use of If i can find some cycles in the next few weeks i should be able to push something up. When I was bench-marking this I think it was about 60,000 changes with a full commit check in around 1.5 min. |
Hi @a-chartier, I am very glad to see that you have been able to work on this type of approach and I look forward to seeing what changes you are able to contribute. |
That would be a fantastic update @a-chartier |
Hi,
I am starting to create a new terraform setup for Juniper devices. When I started to test the the code I see that it is by groups. Is there any way to do it without these?
For example I have a description in ge-0/0/0 which is "My description" and when I try to modify it via terraform it creates a new group with a "New description" description but doesn't override the current information.
This is an easy test but I am worried in the future about going through the code manually when we run into a problem. it's a bit complex with groups instead of directly modify the option.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: