> > - In the scan-wifi and show-wifi output, why not use SECURE (SECURITY > > would be even better) instead of just SEC? I think the proposed SEC > > abbreviation is a little too short. > > The issue is simply one of space -- "SECURE" pushes us over the 80-column > "limit", which means another field has to go or be compressed. We could > compress the LINK field, but we should do so across all dladm subcommands; > ESSID is another candidate for compression, but I worry that may cause > formatting mayhem in common use-cases. Maybe my concern is unfounded, > though? >
While you might be able to reduce the space required for either one, I'd first toss the BSSID from the default output for scan-wifi. Sacrilege to us networking professionals, I'm sure, but to the average user, it's just a bunch of numbers that don't have meaning, and it's over 20% of your output "budget". Other options you might consider: - drop MODE, as it's essentially redundant with SPEED (speed's the factor that matters most to a user, anyway). - drop STATUS in the show-wifi output; the connected/disconnected state seems to be implied by all the rest of the output (though there may be possible modes that can be reached which make that not true; I haven't thought about it in detail). > Further, given that we use the abbreviation elsewhere (e.g., set-secprop) > -- not to mention things like IPsec -- it didn't seem an unreasonable > abbreviation to me. > I don't think it's unreasonable, just that it's less clear than it could be. Dave
