Thanks for responding, John, and for your thoughts. 

That makes sense. I think I will start a thread on the developer's list about 
this. 


“Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in 
the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.” 
Bill Waterson (Calvin & Hobbes) 

----- Original Message -----
From: "jcbollinger" <john.bollin...@stjude.org> 
To: puppet-users@googlegroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 10:57:35 AM 
Subject: [Puppet Users] Re: Facter and eth1 



On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 8:40:56 AM UTC-6, Ygor wrote: 

I have one older server where the physical NIC port for eth0 won't hold the 
CAT5 cable in place, so I use the other NIC port, eth1, and have eth0 
disabled/turned off 

Facts ipaddress and netmask accurately duplicate ipaddress_eth1 and 
netmask_eth1, but macaddress is a duplicate of macaddress_eth0 

I was expecting the same mechanism that makes ipaddress === ipaddress_eth1 
would make macaddress === macaddress_eth1 

Any clues ? 





An ethernet interface has a MAC address even when it is disabled, but not an IP 
address or netmask. The behavior you expected might be an improvement over 
Facter's current behavior, but Facter is not inherently wrong now. You could 
consider filing an RFE. 

In any event, the unadorned network facts such as 'ipaddress', 'netmask', and 
'macaddress' have always been a bit problematic, as their definitions are not 
very useful. Especially for multi-homed systems, there is no single true IP 
address, netmask, or MAC address, regardless of what the existence of those 
facts implies. For multi-NIC systems there is no single, true MAC address even 
if the system is not multi-homed. 

In the mean time, you should be able to write a custom function or inline 
template with which you select from among the macaddress_* facts the one for 
the interface whose IP address matches the unadorned 'ipaddress' fact, by 
correlating macaddress_* with ipaddress_*. 


John 



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group. 
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/puppet-users/-/Awd0cVJ4TR0J . 
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. 
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. 
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Reply via email to