Open dgonzalez85 opened 2 months ago
In the realm of automation, do we really want to promote the use of these "convenience" type commands? Is it a better practice to fully specify the interface details in a port profile? The schema validation should probably warn about the use of this family of commands.
I'd say thats up to the user to specify this as part of the port-profile or globally. In some cases setting this up globally as a default, may benefit users missing to apply the correct port-profile, misconfigurations etc.
Also please note:
Phone configurations in the dot1x TOI are using these global commands (check dot1x interaction with phone vlan feature). https://www.arista.com/en/support/toi/eos-4-24-2f/14567-802-1x-on-arista-switches
And some commands are not available at the interface level.
Enhancement summary
We would like support for the following commands natively in AVD:
These commands are not supported todavia eos_cli_config_gen: https://avd.arista.com/4.10/roles/eos_cli_config_gen/docs/input-variables.html#switchport-default
Note: we support "switchport default phone trunk untagged" but not "switchport default phone trunk untagged phone".
Some related TOIs: https://www.arista.com/en/support/toi/eos-4-28-2f/15899-phone-qos-trust-mode https://www.arista.com/en/support/toi/eos-4-24-2f/14567-802-1x-on-arista-switches
Which component of AVD is impacted
eos_cli_config_gen
Use case example
Set phone defaults globally via AVD natively.
Describe the solution you would like
Support via eos_cli_config_gen for those commands.
Describe alternatives you have considered
Raw cli.
Additional context
No response
Contributing Guide