> In the NWAM code review, we received one comment asking why the > dladm, netadm, and netcfg users are not roles (which as best I > can tell simply prevents anyone from logging in as that user). > The netadm and netcfg users are new ones introduced in nwam phase > 1; I can't think of any reason why we can't or shouldn't make > them roles. But before changing the dladm user, I wanted to ask > a broader audience. Any objections to making the dladm user a > role? Any reason why we wouldn't want to do that?
Seems fine but cosmetic, as the way we ship the system there is no way to log in as 'dladm'. -- meem
