# ~105 Cisco Grok pattern key/field names

**URL:** <https://discuss.elastic.co/t/105-cisco-grok-pattern-key-field-names/50397>\
**Category:** Logstash\
**Created:** [May 19, 2016, 4:44am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/105-cisco-grok-pattern-key-field-names/50397 "2016-05-19T04:44:41Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dm0000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f475e1/32.png) [@dm0000](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/dm0000)\
**Post date:** [May 19, 2016, 4:44am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/105-cisco-grok-pattern-key-field-names/50397/1 "2016-05-19T04:44:41Z")

</div>

There are ~105 distinct Cisco types extracted from the log messages (+/- a few generics).

 ![](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/2X/0/04f4ee913b50b8a36d645330d967461de9589d55.png)

I'm asking this question because I ran into this issue with some custom fields.

Is there a functional difference between interface and interface\_name? Or proto or protocol?

Can they and/or should they be consolidated?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/original/3X/1/a/1ac57faf039f6b580b3f104ef42a2a89e41014de.png) [@system](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/system)\
**Post date:** [July 6, 2017, 4:57am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/105-cisco-grok-pattern-key-field-names/50397/2 "2017-07-06T04:57:02Z")

</div>