FAQ
You could try the ruby gem uuid. That would give you a reasonably unique cert name. You would then run a scan/probe to verify current certs against current nodes and remove unused certs from the master.

The nodes are just rebuilt with a new uuid and register. Wouldn't worry about SSL dir cleaning if security isn't high on you priorities.

Den
On 27/02/2013, at 5:04, yngmike wrote:

Hello everybody.

I'm new to the group and I'm trying to do something a little different here.

Puppet Master: CentOS 6.3 running puppet-server-2.7.14-2.1
Clients: CentOS 6.3 (puppet-2.6.17-2.el6.noarch) & SLES 11.2(puppet 2.7.14-2.1)

I am trying to configure puppet in a very dynamic way. Nodes are not defined in nodes.conf and each client is configured soley by facts that define the role of the node.
Certificate autosigning is turned on.
I am trying to automate the rollout of 50k clients. The clients will not have DNS entries available at the time puppet first runs, but will have DNS sometime an hour or so later.
During the build process the client picks a psuedo random hostname to register to puppet with.

I am trying to figure out a solution that would be totally programatic for registration/re-registration and be tolerant to client hostname changes.

Current issues:

If the client ssl cert is removed from the puppet master (and puppetmasterd is restarted), the client must "rm -rf /var/lib/puppet" and re-run to get a valid cert
if /var/lib/puppet is removed and the ssl certificate still lives on the puppet master the client cannot re-register until the cert is removed from the master
Essentially I will never be using jabber or remote commands so I don't really care what the systems are called, if one stops working I will just replace it with a fresh working build.
I need each system to be able to register/re-register no matter if an entry exists on the puppet master or the local private key gets wiped out. This would be so I can guarantee that the puppet agent will continue to run if its hostname changes, or the local caches need to be wiped programatically to fix a stuck puppet run.

I'm sure this issue has come up before but I can't find anything useful on google results. I understand that these requirements are in place for security reasons, but that is not as much of a concern in this particular implementation (thing 50k dumb nodes that perform simple tasks). I would prefer a more secure method, but it doesn't seem that puppet is tolerant to dynamic nodes that might move around (regularly).

Any ideas?

Thanks,

-Mike















--
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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 2 of 3 | next ›
Discussion Overview
grouppuppet-users @
categoriespuppet
postedFeb 26, '13 at 6:04p
activeFeb 26, '13 at 9:43p
posts3
users3
websitepuppetlabs.com

3 users in discussion

Denmat: 1 post Erik Dalén: 1 post Yngmike: 1 post

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase