T689: updated show host xml and fixed op_mode script names from last PR.

[runborg]

as noted in the phabricator case after my last PR filenames on op_mode scripts was with dash'es insted of underscore. They are now fixed and i also added a rewritten "show host *" xml.

[vyosbot]

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

[dmbaturin]

Microsoft Github 98 won't let me leave review comments in this pull request due to a glitch, so I have to write them here.

"show host date" — why duplicate "show date" from show-date.xml?
"show host os" — my feeling is that people who may have some use for this already know how to get that information (and are far more likely to just type "uname -a" without thinking to check for a special command), and people who do not know about uname -a yet also wouldn't know how to use that information.

"show host lookup" — oh, now this is interesting. Established convention is that show commands only display already available information, from the UI consistency perspective lookup doesn't belong in there.
But where it belongs is a more interesting question. Juniper's approach is to tuck all this stuff in "request", while the Cisco approach is to multiply top level words.
Maybe we shouldn't include it at all. My feeling is that it would suffer the fate of "monitor ... traffic" — most people just type tcpdump instead of trying to remember what the special command was.

[runborg]

Hi! Completely inline with you on that!

"show host date" <-- no reason to duplicate this, also "show date" is easier.. i'll remove it from the code.
"show host os" <-- instead of uname -a , do a uname -r or uname -rv and show it as "kernel: ##" in "show version"? that placement makes more sense than the current one i think.

"show host name" and "show host domain" i cant find any other place to put this.

"show host lookup" <-- agreed, its not a show command.. and should not be.. but i don't know where it should be located. and as you noted... will it be used? what it actually does is testing that DNS is functioning.. so, maybe a "test" top level "test dns-lookup ##" ? do we have anything else that could be moved into a new "test" top level command? (test ntp peer ##, test radius.. etc.)

[dmbaturin]

My point is that "show host os" is very unlikely to be useful: it's faster and more familiar to just use uname with desired options than to remember what that "native" VyOS command was. I also doubt that kernel version is very useful, since "add system image" is the only supported update method and kernel versions of official images are known (and if someone updates the kernel by hand, or makes a custom image, they definitely know enough to verify it by hand — or they shouldn't be doing it).

As of the top level word for DNS lookup, I think it warrants a broader discussion. Still, I'm sceptical of its usefulness. To verify that VyOS can look up names, one can simply do "ping vyos.net".
To verify that DNS forwarding works, one will need the server option.
I'm sceptical even of the ping and traceroute built-ins to be fair. For the most common use case, the raw linux command is just as good, for more complicated things — people likely to want them are also likely to be experienced enough to know the real options.

[runborg]

se your point on "Show host os", i'll remove it.

when were moving towards vyos 2.x and are using the vyconf interpreter instead of vbash, will native linux commands still be available? or do wee need to switch shell to "sh" to use native linux commands? if that is the case i would like to opt them in, because entering another shell to use simple things like ping etc. is not very user friendly.

for a DNS lookup test, yea wee need to have a option to enter DNS server address. the same with all other protocol tests.

[dmbaturin]

Sorry for late reply!
In vyconf, there sure will be some way to run UNIX commands, e.g. with "exec" prefix or similar.

Ok, I think let's keep the lookup. Since it's the kind op mode commands that rarely if ever will be used from scripts, I think we can always change it later.