On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Geoff Crompton <geo...@trinity.unimelb.edu.au> wrote: > seph wrote: >> >> Geoff Crompton <geo...@trinity.unimelb.edu.au> writes: >> >>> This might be a crazy idea, but it just popped into my head, and I >>> wanted to know if it's possible. Perhaps not possible right now, but >>> possible in a theoretical sense. >>> >>> Is it possible that puppet could be modified to be used to manage >>> switches that have a command line based interface? >> >> I think there's a lot of value in configuration management system for >> network stuff. Though I don't think puppet is a good fit. Puppet has >> lots of types that don't really make sense in that context. >> >> http://www.netomata.com is the most recent thing I've seen in this >> space. I'm not sure how far along they are. >> >> seph >> > > I posted a similar question on sage-au just after my puppet post. Someone > pointed me to http://www.netomata.com. While it looks like it has a little > way to go, it looks so good that it deflated my enthusiasm for using puppet > for this. Naturally TMTOWTDI. > > -- > +-Geoff Crompton > +--Debian System Administrator > +---Trinity College >
Just to add a similar 'this would be neat' comment to it, I know several of the Cobbler guys have talked about wanting to see a "libswitch" kind of similar to a libvirt. If we had such a thing, making a Puppet type for it seems quite logical. This sounds like it would be along similar lines. Next steps: X-10 home automation hooks :) --Michael -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-us...@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.
