On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 02:09:27AM -0800, Exinferis wrote: > But what we really want to achieve is not to register every node in > our master configuration (hostnames can totally vary so no wildcard > matching), but to give the nodes the possibility to request a specific > class or to report themselves as a specific type of server.
I think that approach is fundamentally wrong. I do not believe that a puppetmaster should allow clients to decide which host they are, or which configuration they receive. The whole point about central configuration is that you manage it centrally; if your clients can decide, how do you determine what is going on without inspecting every host directly? If most of your hosts are going to have the same configuration, but some will differ, why not use the default node for the common configuration and make different entries for other hosts when you need to? What do you gain by having to go and make configuration changes on each host, rather than just changing configurations in one place? I can tell you one thing you lose; you lose the ability to rebuild from scratch a node that died (with, say, an unrecoverable hard disk). If you really want to do this thing, you could achieve it by modifying your default node configuration so that the extra configuration options are contained in classes which are only included if certain facts are true. You then only create those facts on the hosts you want to have those configurations. I urge you not to do this. -- Bruce Hierophant: someone who remembers, when you are on the way down, everything you did to them on the way up. -- 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.
