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

Tue Mar 23 08:18:35 UTC 2021

On 3/22/21 15:14, Mike Hammett wrote:

> 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).

And this is where it tends to fall flat - when the GUI fails and an 
engineer can no longer setup a peering session with CLI.

The GUI is written in code, much of which will be via CLI. So we can't 
really run away from CLI, unless we are saying that CLI is reserved for 
those who use it to build the GUI, and not for those for whom the GUI is 
being built.

You can also implement a reasonable amount of automation without a GUI.

My goal is to babysit as few layers as possible.

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20210323/651586fd/attachment.html>