RE: Dynamic vs Static and Automated vs Interactive

["Hunkins, Andrew" <ahunkins@unimax.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Shafer [mailto:phil@juniper.net]
> Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 1:42 PM
> To: Hunkins, Andrew
> Cc: Margaret Wasserman; Randy Presuhn; netconf@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Dynamic vs Static and Automated vs Interactive 
> 
> 
> "Hunkins, Andrew" writes:
> >skilled individual who should be doing something more productive than
> >debugging scripts.
> 
> Many ISPs have tools in place where (cost of moving tools to 
> netconf) <
> (cost of new applications) so the CLI script author is not likely to
> go away.


Hmmmmm...

Maybe we just have a philosophical business case disagreement.  So I
don't want to go down any black hole.

But consider an extension of your axiom:

(cost of moving tools to netconf) < (cost of new applications) < (cost
of paying legions of script writers)

In fact I *do* see that as the phases the market will progress through.


> >Are we willing to further define the xmlconf client app 
> communication as
> >non-human-interactive?
> 
> No. We _like_ script writers.

I like them too.  I also liked the people who worked in steno pools 50
years ago.  But I'm glad all those typists have more fulfilling careers
now following the advent of the PC, laser printer  and word-processing
software.  And I hope the same for the script writers when we're
through.  The world could use more good CIOs.

[sorry, passion overflows at this point.]


> 
> Thanks,
>  Phil
> 

--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>