On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 3:50 PM Markus Schade via lpi-examdev <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Judging by stackoverflow ansible is quite dominating:
> http://sotagtrends.com/?tags=%5Bsalt-stack,ansible,chef,puppet%5D
> We should still have awareness of puppet and chef.
> So essentially, as suggested by Fabian, we could simply move over the
> whole configuration management from the DevOps track, but then again I
> think DevOps would miss an essential ops part.
>

I think that is solved by just making it 'awareness-level.'  We're at the
point that Senior SysAdmins needs to be able to identify when systems are
under automation/orchestration, and when they shouldn't be modifying things
directly.  What tools are included is really where I think the focus should
be.

In any case, I'll re-quote Rilindo's agent v. agentless concept, which is
probably important to note too, both in-line (follows) and here in the
archives.
 -
https://list.lpi.org/mailman/private/lpi-examdev/2022-February/004160.html

- bjs

On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 11:37 AM Bryan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

> This is quite outstanding of an approach.  I was, more or less, pulling
> from DevOps and a couple of other sources over a few minutes.
> I much rather prefer what you did here as a way forward for 201 or 202.
>
> - bjs
>
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 11:34 AM Rilindo Foster <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Bryan,
>> I think this is a good start. Because there is a wide swarm of
>> configuration management tools, I might suggest being more generic in the
>> description as follows:
>>
>> Candidates should be able to identify and execute pre-existing
>> configuration management components and solutions to ensure a target server
>> is in a specific state regarding its configuration and installed software.
>>
>> Also, we would want to distinguished between agent-less tools, which
>> would be:
>>    Ansible, Puppet Bolt, chef-run, salt-ssh, etc-keeper
>>
>> And agent-based tools:
>>  puppet agent, chef-client, salt-minion
>>
>> And then indicate which ones requires a control node (or “master”) and
>> which ones does not):
>> Configuration Management is a huge topic that could potentially chew up
>> almost half the exam, so we would want to keep it high-level. I might
>> suggest something like this:
>>
>>  - Basic feature and architecture knowledge of Ansible, Puppet, Chef/Cinc
>>  - Distinguish between agent-less and agent-based tools
>>  - Understand operating model of each tool (client/server, “masterless”)
>>
>> On Feb 9, 2022, at 5:46 PM, Bryan Smith via lpi-examdev <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>> Yeah, to take a first, simple crack at it, I'd probably have something
>> like (needs major refinement) ...
>>
>> Topic 206:  System Maintenance
>>  ...
>> 206.4: Configuration Management (weight: 2 ~ 4?)
>>
>> Description: Candidates should be able to identify and execute
>> pre-existing Ansible, Chef and Puppet components and solutions to ensure a
>> target server is in a specific state regarding its configuration and
>> installed software.
>>
>> Key Knowledge Areas:
>>  - Basic feature and architecture knowledge of Ansible
>>  - Basic feature and architecture knowledge of Chef
>>  - Basic feature and architecture knowledge of Puppet
>>
>> The following is a partial list of the used files, terms and utilities:
>>  - Inventory, Default/Variable, Task, Handler, Builtin
>>  - Recipe, Cookbook, Manifest, Class
>>  - ansible-playbook
>>  - chef-solo
>>  - puppet
>>
>>
-- 
Bryan J Smith  -  http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith
E-mail:  b.j.smith at ieee.org  or  me at bjsmith.me
_______________________________________________
lpi-examdev mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev

Reply via email to