access-list, class-map, policy-map naming question

[pingduck]

Is it a bad form to name access-list, class-map, policy-map all the same or it is encouraged?

Similarly, there are several crypto related configs like authorization policy, authentication policy, keyring, etc that could also share the same name.

[Meheretab Mengistu]

I personally prefer to add additional identifiers to easily identify access-list vs Class-map vs Policy-map. Example, ip access-list extended ACL-BLOCK-ICMP, class-map CM-BLOCK-ICMP, and policy-map PM-BLOCK-ICMP.

I use similar style for crypto related configurations.

HTH,
Meheretab

[Joseph W. Doherty · Accepted solution]

I wouldn't consider it bad form, in fact, if they are exclusively related (i.e. only used together), I believe it especially helps to clarify such a relationship. If the relationship is non-exclusive, you might want to keep just functional names.

Meheretab's suggestion is also good, although if followed I would recommend what he is doing be done as suffixes. This so, for sorting purposes, you usually want logically related elements to sort together and the suffix indicates the kind of element.

[Monica Lluis]

Thank you for helping with his question. We appreciate it.

[Monica Lluis]

pingduck, If you got your question answer, don't forget to mark it as "Accepted Solution" This helps all community members to find useful answers.

Thank you!