Re: comments on version 2 of protocol draft

[Phil Shafer <phil@juniper.net>]

Bobby Krupczak writes:
>I do not feel that
>taking away defaults and making us specify things explicitly has any
>statistically significant impact on the applications we are
>developing.  It only makes them clearer, easier to read, and easier to
>understand.

Defaults are good things.  Which is clearer and easier to understand?

<rpc>
   <go-home>
      <drive-path>automatic</drive-path>
      <car>white</car>
      <parking-spot>first-level</parking-spot>
      <gear>drive</gear>
      <overdrive>enabled</overdrive>
      <windshield-wipers>as-needed</windshield-wipers>
      <rear-defogger>as-needed</rear-defogger>
      <front-defogger>as-needed-after-engine-warms-up</front-defogger>
      <emergency>pregnant-wife</emergency>
      <stopping-style>standard-abrupt</stopping-style>
      <police-mode>obey-traffic-signs</police-mode>
      <no-police-mode>bat-out-of-hell</no-police-mode>
      <fishtail-threshold>0</fishtail-threshold>
      <gasoline-allowance>unlimited</gasoline-allowance>
      <avoid-excessive-tire-wear>false</avoid-excessive-tire-wear>
      <brake-for-turtles>false</brake-for-turtles>
      <brake-for-dolphins>true</brake-for-dolphins>
    </go-home>
</rpc>

or:

<rpc>
   <go-home>
      <emergency>pregnant-wife</emergency>
    </go-home>
</rpc>

Spelling out defaults is a bad thing as software ages (is it an
error if you give a fishtail-threshold for a Segway that doesn't
support fishtailing?).  Also when defaults are calculated or derived
(since no-police-mode is really derived from the value of emergency).

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/>