From owner-freebsd-arch Sat Feb 24 5:24: 2 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from roaming.cacheboy.net (node16292.a2000.nl [24.132.98.146]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC3A437B4EC for ; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 05:23:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from adrian@roaming.cacheboy.net) Received: (from adrian@localhost) by roaming.cacheboy.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f1ODO6L24033; Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:24:06 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from adrian) Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:24:06 +0100 From: Adrian Chadd To: Terry Lambert Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Configuration management Message-ID: <20010224142406.A23979@roaming.cacheboy.net> References: <3A969CD0.DE9E94E1@softweyr.com> <200102232342.QAA01378@usr05.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200102232342.QAA01378@usr05.primenet.com>; from tlambert@primenet.com on Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 11:42:30PM +0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Feb 23, 2001, Terry Lambert wrote: > Even if we stick with "flat text files", and we continue to > edit them by hand, instead of using a method with subschema > inforcement which makes non-sensical configurations impossible > (per Jordan's XML example), the idea that it should be _possible_ > to easily and efficiently machine parse and write these files > using a single API, which can be proxied over a network through > a single data channel, is a valid one. Wow. I'm agreeing with Terry here. I once worked for a large ISP. They had lots and lots of boxes, and they were able to do stuff like install a custom (in-house modified) installation of Redhat (or FreeBSD if they really wanted to) which, when placed on the network, automagically picked up its "role" and configured itself. It then could continue this "role" with periodic configuration updates. How they did it was evil. They had an SQL database(s) with the entire network configuration which they then wrote scripts which would query the database with the machine hostname, pull down a configuration/to-do-list (eg create account "foo", delete account "blah", etc..) and then apply these changes locally. Each application required a seperate set of scripts to maintain. I don't think they had a cute way of updating the RPMs on the machines besides manually doing it, but I'm sure they've solved that one by now. The point is, in order to go from stand-alone UNIX machines to lots-o-machines and have them manageable and flexible required a hell of _a lot_ of work. Just a case study for y'all, Adrian -- Adrian Chadd "Programming is like sex: One mistake and you have to support for a lifetime." -- rec.humor.funny To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message