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 puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. 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.
