[brussels-dev] update: 'dladm show-ether' output

[Peter Memishian]

 > I've been trying to prototype our discussion of "dladm show-ether", and
 > here's what the output from my prototype looks like:
 > 
 > # ./dladm show-ether    
 > link            param     state autoneg  speed(Mb/s)          duplex pause 
 > bge0            current      up       1         1000            full     1 
 > bge1            current      up       1         1000            full     1 
 > 
 > # ./dladm show-ether -x
 > link            param     state autoneg  speed(Mb/s)          duplex pause rem_fault
 > bge0            current      up       1         1000            full     1     0
 >                 capable      --       1  1000,100,10       full,half     1     1
 >                 adv          --       1  1000,100,10       full,half     1     0
 >                 peeradv      --       1  1000,100,10       full,half     1     0
 > bge1            current      up       1         1000            full     1     0
 >                 capable      --       1  1000,100,10       full,half     1     1
 >                 adv          --       1  1000,100,10       full,half     1     0
 >                 peeradv      --       1  1000,100,10       full,half     1     0

I like what's proposed.  A few comments:

	* For consistency with other dladm subcommands using the "new"
	  format, the field names should be in uppercase.

	* The units feel out-of-place in the `speed' field name, and
	  create an asymmetry with "-o" (unless the user is really
	  supposed to type "-o speed(Mb/s)" ;-).  Also, I'd think we'd
	  benefit from grouping the unit with the value itself -- e.g.:

		  $ dladm show-ether -x -o link,param,speed bge0
		  LINK            PARAM       SPEED
		  bge0            current     1G
		                  capable     1G,100M,10M
		                  adv         1G,100M,10M
		                  peeradv     1G,100M,10M

	* Not sure what the column name "param" means (though I can see
	  what it does from context).

	* I'd expect "autoneg" to be no/yes rather than 0/1.  Not sure
	  what the numeric values for pause and rem_fault mean, but I'd
	  prefer words there too, if possible.

	* I'm somewhat uncomfortable with having "-x" vary the set of
	  fields shown (rem_fault above).  It seems more predictable
	  to have that controlled by "-o" (e.g., "-x -o all" to get what's
	  shown above -- and again, I'm OK with "-v" being a synonym for
	  "-o all".)
-- 
meem