YOU wrote that you tested the script from version 6.2…
Don’t you read what you post?
I see the script is in development mode still and thus the default header. When you said about wrong scripting, I thought the main content of the script.
One more reason why on-error is not necessary, just write the script well, if the used machines are so powerful…
Yes the machine is powerful but the use of on-error is mainly a failsafe protection since the intention of the script is not to run only in 7.9 but also in older versions from 6.2 and onwards
One more thing… If you write “Compatible Versions: ROS 6.x” it must be true, you shouldn’t use syntax that only works on RouterOS v7.x
So how did you test it on v6? “Tested on: ROS 6.2 - 7.9”
So far I have tested the script to be working till 6.8 and there since the machine was not so powerful, the nested on-error issue was found due to more time to generate the key and thus the post.
The comments alone are full of mistakes, without considering the mess rest… I would never put (my) name on it…
Yes I agree that the comments are misleading but the post was to seek help for the main content of the script but not the comment. As a DevOP we both know that it is a common practice to update the comments at then end of everything (during the testing and QA)