Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...?

Mon Mar 22 13:14:39 UTC 2021

I would love to have HTTP GUI that just does all of the dirty work. However, a sufficient number of people affiliated with that organization do indeed need to be able to CLI their way through the troubleshooting process for when the HTTP GUI inevitably fails (everything inevitably fails). 

----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Eric Kuhnke" <eric.kuhnke at gmail.com> 
To: "David Siegel" <arizonagull at gmail.com>, "nanog at nanog.org list" <nanog at nanog.org> 
Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2021 8:45:38 PM 
Subject: Re: Perhaps it's time to think about enhancements to the NANOG list...? 

It's one thing to use a GUI tool when it's convenient and quick. I think anyone that's ever experienced setting up a Unifi controller would probably prefer provisioning a new 802.11ac AP from the GUI rather than doing it manually at a command line. 

But it's another thing to consider that we have a whole new generation of people who don't know and don't care what's going underneath the GUI and might not be able to do anything with the OS running on bare metal, if they have to. 

If we intend to abstract away configuring devices to a GUI level only and not care about what's going on under the hood, then it's time for everyone to just run out and renew their MCSE certifications and buy Meraki subscriptions. 

On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 6:35 PM David Siegel < arizonagull at gmail.com > wrote: 

...not to mention that all mature networks are moving more towards GUI front ends for their automated network. As the complexity of a network increases, CLI access becomes considerably more risky. 

The idea that "real engineers use the CLI" is dinosaur thinking that will eventually land those with that philosophy out of a job. Just my personal $.02 (though I'm certainly not alone in my opinion). 

But I'd like to reiterate that the board's goal with modernization is not to alienate anyone from the existing community by forcing them into a web-interface. Discourse is under evaluation, and if it doesn't accomplish the goal we'll try something else or build our own tool. 

Dave 

On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 6:52 PM Matthew Petach < mpetach at netflight.com > wrote: 

<blockquote>

On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 5:13 PM scott < surfer at mauigateway.com > wrote: 

[...] 
<blockquote>
Of course, one would 
not find an HTTP GUI on the bigger networks dealt with on this list; 
only on the tiny networks. So they're beginning learners and are, of 
course, welcome. They will lean a lot, just as I did in the early days 
and do every day now days. 

[...] 
<blockquote>
scott 

</blockquote>

Let's see... 
Google: Gmail 
Microsoft: Hotmail/Outlook/Office365 
Yahoo/VerizonMedia: Yahoo Mail 

I'd have to say, there's some pretty big networks on this list that 
use HTTP GUIs for their email. 

Of course, you might be big enough that you look down on the 
networks of Google, Microsoft, and VZM as "tiny networks" -- in 
which case, you're definitely entitled to your opinion, as all 8000 
pound gorillas that look down on the puny 800 lb gorillas are. ;) 

Matt 

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20210322/e9abf9b2/attachment.html>