On (01/30/09 08:53), Darren Reed wrote: >> I'm not a networking person. I'm a systems administrator. I would humbly >> suggest that involving systems administrators in these discussions would >> be a good thing. >> >> So just for my own personal opinion, I do not want the model where everything >> I do is tagged as persistent. Non-persistent should be the default. If >> I'm typing >> commands, normally it's because I'm in experimental or debugging mode. If I >> want to make persistent changes then I'll automate or script or just go >> behind >> the back of the commands and edit the config file. >> >> What *would* be really useful is a way of saying "hey, this is just perfect, >> now >> save the current configuration". >> > > +1 > and the idea of being able to say "save the current config" is novel & new.
The problem with "going behind the back of the commands and editing config" restricts the interface presented by the command and the config file itself. And it requires the sysadmin to frequently know more about the underlying implementation(s) than they ever wanted to know. The classic example here is ndd: the model presented was to run /sbin/ndd on the running-config and then make the change persistent by editing some /etc/rc*.d file. This is not a stable way of making the change stick: some other /etc/rc*.d script added at a later point could make the setting meaningless. --Sowmini
