On Thursday, September 4, 2014 5:50:43 PM UTC-5, Jason Antman wrote: > > Agreed with Atom... > > I generally think that this method is backwards. The system shouldn't tell > Puppet what it wants to be; Puppet (possibly fed by some external data > source(s)) should tell the system what to be. >
+1 > Sure, in some very large environments with a small number of possible > configurations, the other way around will work. But why do something like > tie your entire CM system to a hostname convention? > > And since that data has to be recorded *somewhere*, why disperse it among the nodes and trust them to feed it back rightly? Moreover, supposing you use Puppet's default hostname-as-certname scheme, why semi-permanently bind each node to be a particular kind of machine, as encoding that information in its certname would do? John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-users/8896ce1e-c912-470a-a268-09a5e6ffaea5%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
