Grokbase › Groups › Puppet › puppet-users › January 2013
FAQ
The question: how can I get extra debugging/troubleshooting information to figure out why my F5 resources aren't applying? I see my "puppet device" command claiming to have applied an f5_node and f5_rule, but the irule and node respectively do not appear in the device's config.

I have already turned up logging on the F5 device and debug/verbose in my puppet device run and found nothing obvious there.

(More details below.)

I see these:

Notice: /Stage[main]//Node[my_f5]/F5_node[192.168.127.1]/ensure: created
Notice: /Stage[main]//Node[my_f5]/F5_rule[cw1]/ensure: created

As part of this set of debug output, but:

[cwood@lb-lab:Active] log # grep cw1 /config/bigip.conf
[cwood@lb-lab:Active] log #

This is using puppet 3.0.2 on CentOS 6.3 x86_64.

My resources are as follows (one obviously from the module README):

   f5_rule { 'cw1':
     ensure => present,
     definition => 'when HTTP_REQUEST {}',
   }

   f5_node { '192.168.127.1':
     ensure => present,
   }

Here is more debug output:

Debug: Puppet::Device::F5: connecting to F5 device my_f5.
Debug: Puppet::Device::F5: connecting to partition Common.
Debug: Using cached certificate for ca
Debug: Using cached certificate for my_f5
Debug: Loaded state in 0.00 seconds
Debug: node supports formats: b64_zlib_yaml pson raw yaml; using pson
Debug: Using cached certificate for ca
Debug: Using cached certificate for my_f5
Debug: Using cached certificate_revocation_list for ca
Info: Retrieving plugin
Debug: file_metadata supports formats: b64_zlib_yaml pson raw yaml; using pson
Debug: Finishing transaction 70108264693680
Debug: catalog supports formats: b64_zlib_yaml dot pson raw yaml; using pson
Info: Caching catalog for my_f5
Debug: Creating default schedules
Debug: Loaded state in 0.00 seconds
Info: Applying configuration version '1358454564'
Debug: Stage[main]: Skipping host resources because running on a device
Debug: Class[Main]: Skipping host resources because running on a device
Debug: Class[Settings]: Skipping host resources because running on a device
Debug: Class[Settings]: Skipping host resources because running on a device
Debug: Node[my_f5]: Skipping host resources because running on a device
Debug: Puppet::Provider::F5_Node: creating F5 node 192.168.127.1
Notice: /Stage[main]//Node[my_f5]/F5_node[192.168.127.1]/ensure: created
Debug: /Stage[main]//Node[my_f5]/F5_node[192.168.127.1]: The container Node[my_f5] will propagate my refresh event
Debug: Puppet::Provider::F5_Rule: creating cw1
Notice: /Stage[main]//Node[my_f5]/F5_rule[cw1]/ensure: created
Debug: /Stage[main]//Node[my_f5]/F5_rule[cw1]: The container Node[my_f5] will propagate my refresh event
Debug: Node[my_f5]: Skipping host resources because running on a device
Debug: Node[my_f5]: The container Class[Main] will propagate my refresh event
Debug: /Filebucket[puppet]: Skipping host resources because running on a device
Debug: Class[Main]: Skipping host resources because running on a device
Debug: Class[Main]: The container Stage[main] will propagate my refresh event
Debug: Stage[main]: Skipping host resources because running on a device
Debug: Finishing transaction 70108265534620
Debug: Storing state
Debug: Stored state in 0.13 seconds
Notice: Finished catalog run in 0.97 seconds
Debug: Value of 'preferred_serialization_format' (pson) is invalid for report, using default (b64_zlib_yaml)
Debug: report supports formats: b64_zlib_yaml raw yaml; using b64_zlib_yaml

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

Search Discussions

  • Nan Liu at Jan 17, 2013 at 9:27 pm ⇧

    On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Christopher Wood wrote:

    The question: how can I get extra debugging/troubleshooting information to
    figure out why my F5 resources aren't applying? I see my "puppet device"
    command claiming to have applied an f5_node and f5_rule, but the irule and
    node respectively do not appear in the device's config.

    I have already turned up logging on the F5 device and debug/verbose in my
    puppet device run and found nothing obvious there.

    (More details below.)

    I see these:

    Notice: /Stage[main]//Node[my_f5]/F5_node[192.168.127.1]/ensure: created
    Notice: /Stage[main]//Node[my_f5]/F5_rule[cw1]/ensure: created

    As part of this set of debug output, but:

    [cwood@lb-lab:Active] log # grep cw1 /config/bigip.conf
    [cwood@lb-lab:Active] log #
    I'm not familiar with F5 tmsh, the puppet module is using iControl to
    update the device, so I don't know how changes are reflected in the text
    config.

    If you run puppet again does it attempt to make the same changes again? If
    not the changes should have taken effect. Can you login to the web console
    and review if the rules were added to the device?

    Thanks,

    Nan

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
    To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
  • Christopher Wood at Jan 17, 2013 at 9:37 pm ⇧
    (inline)
    On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 03:27:40PM -0600, Nan Liu wrote:
    On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Christopher Wood
    wrote:

    The question: how can I get extra debugging/troubleshooting information
    to figure out why my F5 resources aren't applying? I see my "puppet
    device" command claiming to have applied an f5_node and f5_rule, but the
    irule and node respectively do not appear in the device's config.

    I have already turned up logging on the F5 device and debug/verbose in
    my puppet device run and found nothing obvious there.

    (More details below.)

    I see these:

    Notice: /Stage[main]//Node[my_f5]/F5_node[192.168.127.1]/ensure: created
    Notice: /Stage[main]//Node[my_f5]/F5_rule[cw1]/ensure: created

    As part of this set of debug output, but:

    [cwood@lb-lab:Active] log # grep cw1 /config/bigip.conf
    [cwood@lb-lab:Active] log #

    I'm not familiar with F5 tmsh, the puppet module is using iControl to
    update the device, so I don't know how changes are reflected in the text
    config.�
    Usually when I make a change via the gui or tmsh I see the change reflected in the text config right away.
    If you run puppet again does it attempt to make the same changes again?
    Yes, it does.
    If
    not the changes should have taken effect. Can you login to the web console
    and review if the rules were added to the device?
    The changes were not applied to the device. (There is only the common partition and four nodes on the lab F5, and I was trying to add the fifth node.)
    Thanks,
    Nan

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "Puppet Users" group.
    To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
    puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit this group at
    http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

    References

    Visible links
    1. mailto:christopher_wood@pobox.com
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
    To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
  • Nan Liu at Jan 17, 2013 at 9:48 pm ⇧

    On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Christopher Wood wrote:
    Usually when I make a change via the gui or tmsh I see the change
    reflected in the text config right away.

    Good to know.

    If you run puppet again does it attempt to make the same changes
    again?

    Yes, it does.
    Interesting, what version of F5 are you using?

    If you trim the manifests down, isolate to just an iRule and enable --debug
    do you see this line:

    Puppet::Provider::F5_Rule: creating {rule_name}

    https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-f5/blob/master/lib/puppet/provider/f5_rule/f5_rule.rb#L35

    Does this message show up? In most cases any failure will result in an
    appropriate SOAP error, so I'm curious if the transport should be
    investigated or the puppet version (since you mentioned 3.0.2).

    Thanks,

    Nan

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
    To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
  • Christopher Wood at Jan 17, 2013 at 10:07 pm ⇧

    On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 03:48:08PM -0600, Nan Liu wrote:
    On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Christopher Wood
    wrote:

    Usually when I make a change via the gui or tmsh I see the change
    reflected in the text config right away.

    Good to know.
    �
    � �If you run puppet again does it attempt to make the same changes
    again?

    Yes, it does.

    Interesting, what version of F5 are you using?
    BIG-IP 11.1.0 Build 1943.0 Final

    Sounds like the f5-icontrol-10.2.0.2.gem could not work with that (unless anybody here has a different experience). I'll file a case with F5 to ask them.
    If you trim the manifests down, isolate to just an iRule and enable
    --debug do you see this line:
    Puppet::Provider::F5_Rule: creating {rule_name}
    [2]https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-f5/blob/master/lib/puppet/provider/f5_rule/f5_rule.rb#L35
    I do see these for both:

    Debug: Puppet::Provider::F5_Node: creating F5 node 192.168.127.1
    Debug: Puppet::Provider::F5_Rule: creating cw1

    Possibly time to go bother F5 about their gem.
    Does this message show up? In most cases any failure will result in an
    appropriate SOAP error, so I'm curious if the transport should be
    investigated or the puppet version (since you mentioned 3.0.2).
    Thanks,
    Nan

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "Puppet Users" group.
    To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
    puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit this group at
    http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

    References

    Visible links
    1. mailto:christopher_wood@pobox.com
    2. https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-f5/blob/master/lib/puppet/provider/f5_rule/f5_rule.rb#L35
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
    To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
  • Christopher Wood at Feb 11, 2013 at 4:28 pm ⇧
    (Following up to my own post for posterity's sake, see xkcd.com/979.)

    Short form: for me this isn't yet as easy as a file resource but the puppetized management payoff will be worth the work. My issues are most likely a reflection of my own puppet/ruby/iControl/SOAP skill.

    I am going to explore a personalized set of F5 types/providers that I can use without first loading up the wsdl file for every involved iControl interface, version, and hotfix.



    Points from my various BigIP/puppet experimentations:

    a) The f5-icontrol-10.2.0.2.gem doesn't necessarily work with LTM 11.1.0. (Or I haven't figured it out, also quite likely.) This could be because the gem ships different wsdl files but I couldn't get it to work with later iControl wsdl files anyway.

    b) In LTM 11, F5 deprecated some interfaces so puppet f5 module providers like f5_node are suddenly using deprecated interfaces.

    c) Some parts of the iControl api are being updated/fixed over time, for instance the hotfix id 388590 reading "Certificates can now successfully be updated using the iControl Management::KeyCertificate interface", see:

    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html

    d) Judging by my soap-newbie eye the soap4r package appears abandonware, savon isn't up to complicated data structures and I have yet to dive into handsoap (the starter page says to start with a wsdl, see my wsdl-tracking issues). Picking the right soap package to use is likely going to be job 1.

    (If the list has any feedback to the above, I'm very much all ears.)

    On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 05:07:36PM -0500, Christopher Wood wrote:
    On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 03:48:08PM -0600, Nan Liu wrote:
    On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Christopher Wood
    wrote:

    Usually when I make a change via the gui or tmsh I see the change
    reflected in the text config right away.

    Good to know.
    �
    � �If you run puppet again does it attempt to make the same changes
    again?

    Yes, it does.

    Interesting, what version of F5 are you using?
    BIG-IP 11.1.0 Build 1943.0 Final

    Sounds like the f5-icontrol-10.2.0.2.gem could not work with that (unless anybody here has a different experience). I'll file a case with F5 to ask them.
    If you trim the manifests down, isolate to just an iRule and enable
    --debug do you see this line:
    Puppet::Provider::F5_Rule: creating {rule_name}
    [2]https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-f5/blob/master/lib/puppet/provider/f5_rule/f5_rule.rb#L35
    I do see these for both:

    Debug: Puppet::Provider::F5_Node: creating F5 node 192.168.127.1
    Debug: Puppet::Provider::F5_Rule: creating cw1

    Possibly time to go bother F5 about their gem.
    Does this message show up? In most cases any failure will result in an
    appropriate SOAP error, so I'm curious if the transport should be
    investigated or the puppet version (since you mentioned 3.0.2).
    Thanks,
    Nan

    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
    "Puppet Users" group.
    To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
    puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit this group at
    http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.

    References

    Visible links
    1. mailto:christopher_wood@pobox.com
    2. https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-f5/blob/master/lib/puppet/provider/f5_rule/f5_rule.rb#L35
    --
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group.
    To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
    For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
    --
    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.
  • Nan Liu at Feb 11, 2013 at 8:48 pm ⇧

    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Christopher Wood wrote:

    (Following up to my own post for posterity's sake, see xkcd.com/979.)

    Short form: for me this isn't yet as easy as a file resource but the
    puppetized management payoff will be worth the work. My issues are most
    likely a reflection of my own puppet/ruby/iControl/SOAP skill.

    I am going to explore a personalized set of F5 types/providers that I can
    use without first loading up the wsdl file for every involved iControl
    interface, version, and hotfix.



    Points from my various BigIP/puppet experimentations:

    a) The f5-icontrol-10.2.0.2.gem doesn't necessarily work with LTM 11.1.0.
    (Or I haven't figured it out, also quite likely.) This could be because the
    gem ships different wsdl files but I couldn't get it to work with later
    iControl wsdl files anyway.

    b) In LTM 11, F5 deprecated some interfaces so puppet f5 module providers
    like f5_node are suddenly using deprecated interfaces.

    c) Some parts of the iControl api are being updated/fixed over time, for
    instance the hotfix id 388590 reading "Certificates can now successfully be
    updated using the iControl Management::KeyCertificate interface", see:

    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html

    d) Judging by my soap-newbie eye the soap4r package appears abandonware,
    savon isn't up to complicated data structures and I have yet to dive into
    handsoap (the starter page says to start with a wsdl, see my wsdl-tracking
    issues). Picking the right soap package to use is likely going to be job 1.

    (If the list has any feedback to the above, I'm very much all ears.)

    Have you tried the v11 gem?
    https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306. The module certainly
    needs to updates against v11 API, but seems like it would be a better
    starting point.

    Nan

    --
    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.
  • Christopher Wood at Feb 11, 2013 at 9:31 pm ⇧

    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:40:12PM -0800, Nan Liu wrote:
    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Christopher Wood
    wrote:

    (Following up to my own post for posterity's sake, see [2]xkcd.com/979.)

    Short form: for me this isn't yet as easy as a file resource but the
    puppetized management payoff will be worth the work. My issues are most
    likely a reflection of my own puppet/ruby/iControl/SOAP skill.

    I am going to explore a personalized set of F5 types/providers that I
    can use without first loading up the wsdl file for every involved
    iControl interface, version, and hotfix.

    Points from my various BigIP/puppet experimentations:

    a) The f5-icontrol-10.2.0.2.gem doesn't necessarily work with LTM
    11.1.0. (Or I haven't figured it out, also quite likely.) This could be
    because the gem ships different wsdl files but I couldn't get it to work
    with later iControl wsdl files anyway.

    b) In LTM 11, F5 deprecated some interfaces so puppet f5 module
    providers like f5_node are suddenly using deprecated interfaces.

    c) Some parts of the iControl api are being updated/fixed over time, for
    instance the hotfix id 388590 reading "Certificates can now successfully
    be updated using the iControl Management::KeyCertificate interface",
    see:

    [3]http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html

    d) Judging by my soap-newbie eye the soap4r package appears abandonware,
    savon isn't up to complicated data structures and I have yet to dive
    into handsoap (the starter page says to start with a wsdl, see my
    wsdl-tracking issues). Picking the right soap package to use is likely
    going to be job 1.

    (If the list has any feedback to the above, I'm very much all ears.)

    Have you tried the v11
    gem?�[4]https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306. The module
    certainly needs to updates against v11 API, but seems like it would be a
    better starting point.
    Nan�
    I might give that a go. That LTM 11 gem is for 11.1.0 and I'm already on 11.3.0 in the lab due to a key/cert management issue, but the gem should be fine if I rebuild it with the wsdl files from my lab device.
    --
    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 [5]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
    For more options, visit [6]https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



    References

    Visible links
    1. mailto:christopher_wood@pobox.com
    2. http://xkcd.com/979
    3. http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    4. https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    5. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    6. 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.
  • Jgmchan at Jun 11, 2013 at 2:06 pm ⇧
    Hi Chris,

    How did you go with trying to use the Puppet F5 module with v11.3.0? I
    think I am having the same issue as you were.

    The puppet output would say that the resource was created but the iControl
    debug logs shows that it is being sent an empty SOAP create message.

    I've tried running a simple ruby script using the 10.2.0.2 f5 gem and was
    able to create the node successfully so it looks the Puppet is doing
    something funny.

    Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks,
    Jeff
    On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 8:31:04 AM UTC+11, Christopher Wood wrote:
    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:40:12PM -0800, Nan Liu wrote:
    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Christopher Wood
    <[1]christop...@pobox.com <javascript:>> wrote:

    (Following up to my own post for posterity's sake, see [2]
    xkcd.com/979.)
    Short form: for me this isn't yet as easy as a file resource but the
    puppetized management payoff will be worth the work. My issues are most
    likely a reflection of my own puppet/ruby/iControl/SOAP skill.

    I am going to explore a personalized set of F5 types/providers that I
    can use without first loading up the wsdl file for every involved
    iControl interface, version, and hotfix.

    Points from my various BigIP/puppet experimentations:

    a) The f5-icontrol-10.2.0.2.gem doesn't necessarily work with LTM
    11.1.0. (Or I haven't figured it out, also quite likely.) This could be
    because the gem ships different wsdl files but I couldn't get it to work
    with later iControl wsdl files anyway.

    b) In LTM 11, F5 deprecated some interfaces so puppet f5 module
    providers like f5_node are suddenly using deprecated interfaces.

    c) Some parts of the iControl api are being updated/fixed over time, for
    instance the hotfix id 388590 reading "Certificates can now
    successfully
    be updated using the iControl Management::KeyCertificate
    interface",
    see:

    [3]
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    d) Judging by my soap-newbie eye the soap4r package appears
    abandonware,
    savon isn't up to complicated data structures and I have yet to dive
    into handsoap (the starter page says to start with a wsdl, see my
    wsdl-tracking issues). Picking the right soap package to use is likely
    going to be job 1.

    (If the list has any feedback to the above, I'm very much all ears.)
    Have you tried the v11
    gem?�[4]https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306. The module
    certainly needs to updates against v11 API, but seems like it would be a
    better starting point.
    Nan�
    I might give that a go. That LTM 11 gem is for 11.1.0 and I'm already on
    11.3.0 in the lab due to a key/cert management issue, but the gem should be
    fine if I rebuild it with the wsdl files from my lab device.
    --
    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...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
    To post to this group, send email to puppet...@googlegroups.com<javascript:>.
    Visit this group at [5]
    http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
    For more options, visit [6]https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



    References

    Visible links
    1. mailto:christop...@pobox.com <javascript:>
    2. http://xkcd.com/979
    3.
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    4. https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    5. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    6. 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.
  • Christopher Wood at Jun 12, 2013 at 5:34 am ⇧
    Unfortunately due to various non-puppet bigip upgrade issues I haven't been able to back to this yet. If I get anything useful working I will post.
    On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 03:32:56AM -0700, jgmchan@gmail.com wrote:
    Hi Chris,
    How did you go with trying to use the Puppet F5 module with v11.3.0? I
    think I am having the same issue as you were.
    The puppet output would say that the resource was created but the iControl
    debug logs shows that it is being sent an empty SOAP create message.
    I've tried running a simple ruby script using the 10.2.0.2 f5 gem and was
    able to create the node successfully so it looks the Puppet is doing
    something funny.
    Any help would be greatly appreciated.
    Thanks,
    Jeff

    On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 8:31:04 AM UTC+11, Christopher Wood wrote:
    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:40:12PM -0800, Nan Liu wrote:
    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Christopher Wood
    wrote:

    (Following up to my own post for posterity's sake, see
    [2][2]xkcd.com/979.)
    Short form: for me this isn't yet as easy as a file resource but the
    puppetized management payoff will be worth the work. My issues are most
    likely a reflection of my own puppet/ruby/iControl/SOAP skill.

    I am going to explore a personalized set of F5 types/providers that I
    can use without first loading up the wsdl file for every involved
    iControl interface, version, and hotfix.

    Points from my various BigIP/puppet experimentations:

    a) The f5-icontrol-10.2.0.2.gem doesn't necessarily work with LTM
    11.1.0. (Or I haven't figured it out, also quite likely.) This could be
    because the gem ships different wsdl files but I couldn't get it to work
    with later iControl wsdl files anyway.

    b) In LTM 11, F5 deprecated some interfaces so puppet f5 module
    providers like f5_node are suddenly using deprecated interfaces.

    c) Some parts of the iControl api are being updated/fixed over time, for
    instance the hotfix id 388590 reading "Certificates can now
    successfully
    be updated using the iControl Management::KeyCertificate
    interface",
    see:

    [3][3]http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    d) Judging by my soap-newbie eye the soap4r package appears
    abandonware,
    savon isn't up to complicated data structures and I have yet to dive
    into handsoap (the starter page says to start with a wsdl, see my
    wsdl-tracking issues). Picking the right soap package to use is likely
    going to be job 1.

    (If the list has any feedback to the above, I'm very much all ears.)
    Have you tried the v11
    gem?�[4][4]https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306. The module
    certainly needs to updates against v11 API, but seems like it would be a
    better starting point.
    Nan�
    I might give that a go. That LTM 11 gem is for 11.1.0 and I'm already on
    11.3.0 in the lab due to a key/cert management issue, but the gem should
    be fine if I rebuild it with the wsdl files from my lab device.
    --
    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 [5]puppet-users...@googlegroups.com.
    To post to this group, send email to [6]puppet...@googlegroups.com.
    Visit this group at
    [5][7]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
    For more options, visit
    [6][8]https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


    References

    Visible links
    1. mailto:[9]christop...@pobox.com
    2. [10]http://xkcd.com/979
    3.
    [11]http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    4. [12]https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    5. [13]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    6. [14]https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out
    References

    Visible links
    1. javascript:
    2. http://xkcd.com/979
    3. http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    4. https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    5. javascript:
    6. javascript:
    7. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    8. https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out
    9. javascript:
    10. http://xkcd.com/979
    11. http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    12. https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    13. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    14. 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.
  • Jgmchan at Jun 18, 2013 at 12:56 pm ⇧
    Hi Chris,

    I think I've narrowed the issue down.

    I'm able to use the 10.2.0.2 f5 gem in a simple script with F5 v11.3.0 to
    create an f5_node so it looks like the F5 is keeping some
    backwards-compatibility.

    The problem is only occurring when the F5 gem is used within puppet. The f5
    gem is using the ruby 1.8.7's built-in SOAP library that clashes with a
    monkey-patch in Puppet to override the instance_variables method of the
    basic Ruby Object class.

    The patch was introduced in this
    commit: https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppet/commit/1f4e44c26a0d703d1192d26ef8ab555e4508e338
    *lib/puppet/util/monkey_patches.rb*:

         class Object
           alias :puppet_original_instance_variables :instance_variables

           def instance_variables
             puppet_original_instance_variables.map(&:to_sym)
           end
         end


    This in turn clashes with the SOAP class in Ruby 1.8.7:
    lib/soap/mapping/mapping.rb:

       def self.get_attribute(obj, attr_name)
         if obj.is_a?(::Hash)
           obj[attr_name] || obj[attr_name.intern]
         else
           name = XSD::CodeGen::GenSupport.safevarname(attr_name)
           if obj.instance_variables.include?('@' + name)
             obj.instance_variable_get('@' + name)
           elsif ((obj.is_a?(::Struct) or obj.is_a?(Marshallable)) and
               obj.respond_to?(name))
             obj.__send__(name)
           end
         end
       end


    Since Puppet has overridden the instance_variable method to return an Array
    of Symbols, this breaks the obj.instance_variables.include?('@' + name)
    line because it is trying to compare a Symbol with a String which will
    always be false. This in turn causes the F5 gem to send SOAP requests to
    the F5 with nil values so the nodes are never created on the F5.

    This is a pretty strange issue as I thought that there would have been
    other users of the puppetlabs-f5 module with Ruby 1.8.7 and so would have
    hit the same issue, or am I missing something?

    Anyway, it looks like to fix the problem we'll either need to patch the F5
    gem to override the above method within Ruby or somehow revert the
    monkeypatch in Puppet for the F5 puppet module, unless you can think of a
    cleaner and better solution?

    Jeff
    On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:34:02 PM UTC+10, Christopher Wood wrote:

    Unfortunately due to various non-puppet bigip upgrade issues I haven't
    been able to back to this yet. If I get anything useful working I will
    post.

    On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 03:32:56AM -0700, jgm...@gmail.com <javascript:>wrote:
    Hi Chris,
    How did you go with trying to use the Puppet F5 module with v11.3.0? I
    think I am having the same issue as you were.
    The puppet output would say that the resource was created but the iControl
    debug logs shows that it is being sent an empty SOAP create message.
    I've tried running a simple ruby script using the 10.2.0.2 f5 gem and was
    able to create the node successfully so it looks the Puppet is doing
    something funny.
    Any help would be greatly appreciated.
    Thanks,
    Jeff

    On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 8:31:04 AM UTC+11, Christopher Wood
    wrote:
    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:40:12PM -0800, Nan Liu wrote:
    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Christopher Wood
    wrote:

    (Following up to my own post for posterity's sake, see
    [2][2]xkcd.com/979.)
    Short form: for me this isn't yet as easy as a file resource
    but
    the
    puppetized management payoff will be worth the work. My
    issues
    are most
    likely a reflection of my own puppet/ruby/iControl/SOAP
    skill.
    I am going to explore a personalized set of F5
    types/providers
    that I
    can use without first loading up the wsdl file for every
    involved
    iControl interface, version, and hotfix.

    Points from my various BigIP/puppet experimentations:

    a) The f5-icontrol-10.2.0.2.gem doesn't necessarily work
    with LTM
    11.1.0. (Or I haven't figured it out, also quite likely.)
    This
    could be
    because the gem ships different wsdl files but I couldn't
    get it
    to work
    with later iControl wsdl files anyway.

    b) In LTM 11, F5 deprecated some interfaces so puppet f5
    module
    providers like f5_node are suddenly using deprecated
    interfaces.
    c) Some parts of the iControl api are being updated/fixed
    over
    time, for
    instance the hotfix id 388590 reading "Certificates can now
    successfully
    be updated using the iControl Management::KeyCertificate
    interface",
    see:
    [3][3]
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    d) Judging by my soap-newbie eye the soap4r package appears
    abandonware,
    savon isn't up to complicated data structures and I have yet
    to
    dive
    into handsoap (the starter page says to start with a wsdl,
    see my
    wsdl-tracking issues). Picking the right soap package to use
    is
    likely
    going to be job 1.

    (If the list has any feedback to the above, I'm very much
    all
    ears.)
    Have you tried the v11
    gem?�[4][4]https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306.
    The
    module
    certainly needs to updates against v11 API, but seems like it
    would
    be a
    better starting point.
    Nan�
    I might give that a go. That LTM 11 gem is for 11.1.0 and I'm
    already on
    11.3.0 in the lab due to a key/cert management issue, but the gem should
    be fine if I rebuild it with the wsdl files from my lab device.
    --
    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 [5]puppet-users...@googlegroups.com.
    To post to this group, send email to [6]
    puppet...@googlegroups.com.
    Visit this group at
    [5][7]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
    For more options, visit
    [6][8]https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


    References

    Visible links
    1. mailto:[9]christop...@pobox.com
    2. [10]http://xkcd.com/979
    3.
    [11]
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    4. [12]https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    5. [13]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    6. [14]https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out
    References

    Visible links
    1. javascript:
    2. http://xkcd.com/979
    3.
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    4. https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    5. javascript:
    6. javascript:
    7. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    8. https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out
    9. javascript:
    10. http://xkcd.com/979
    11.
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    12. https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    13. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    14. 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.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Gavin Williams at Jul 30, 2013 at 6:57 am ⇧
    Jeff/Chris/All

    Completely missed this topic when doing my own investigations on this
    issue...

    However the same problem discussed on Puppet-dev<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/puppet-dev/bU0_X_MOiuo>has highlighted the same issue...
    I have therefore raised Issue 21975<http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/21975>to try and get it fixed... Would probably be beneficial if you could
    up-vote it...

    Cheers
    Gavin
    On Tuesday, 18 June 2013 13:56:33 UTC+1, jgm...@gmail.com wrote:

    Hi Chris,

    I think I've narrowed the issue down.

    I'm able to use the 10.2.0.2 f5 gem in a simple script with F5 v11.3.0 to
    create an f5_node so it looks like the F5 is keeping some
    backwards-compatibility.

    The problem is only occurring when the F5 gem is used within puppet. The
    f5 gem is using the ruby 1.8.7's built-in SOAP library that clashes with a
    monkey-patch in Puppet to override the instance_variables method of the
    basic Ruby Object class.

    The patch was introduced in this commit:
    https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppet/commit/1f4e44c26a0d703d1192d26ef8ab555e4508e338
    *lib/puppet/util/monkey_patches.rb*:

    class Object
    alias :puppet_original_instance_variables :instance_variables

    def instance_variables
    puppet_original_instance_variables.map(&:to_sym)
    end
    end


    This in turn clashes with the SOAP class in Ruby 1.8.7:
    lib/soap/mapping/mapping.rb:

    def self.get_attribute(obj, attr_name)
    if obj.is_a?(::Hash)
    obj[attr_name] || obj[attr_name.intern]
    else
    name = XSD::CodeGen::GenSupport.safevarname(attr_name)
    if obj.instance_variables.include?('@' + name)
    obj.instance_variable_get('@' + name)
    elsif ((obj.is_a?(::Struct) or obj.is_a?(Marshallable)) and
    obj.respond_to?(name))
    obj.__send__(name)
    end
    end
    end


    Since Puppet has overridden the instance_variable method to return an
    Array of Symbols, this breaks the obj.instance_variables.include?('@' +
    name) line because it is trying to compare a Symbol with a String which
    will always be false. This in turn causes the F5 gem to send SOAP requests
    to the F5 with nil values so the nodes are never created on the F5.

    This is a pretty strange issue as I thought that there would have been
    other users of the puppetlabs-f5 module with Ruby 1.8.7 and so would have
    hit the same issue, or am I missing something?

    Anyway, it looks like to fix the problem we'll either need to patch the F5
    gem to override the above method within Ruby or somehow revert the
    monkeypatch in Puppet for the F5 puppet module, unless you can think of a
    cleaner and better solution?

    Jeff
    On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:34:02 PM UTC+10, Christopher Wood wrote:

    Unfortunately due to various non-puppet bigip upgrade issues I haven't
    been able to back to this yet. If I get anything useful working I will
    post.
    On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 03:32:56AM -0700, jgm...@gmail.com wrote:
    Hi Chris,
    How did you go with trying to use the Puppet F5 module with v11.3.0? I
    think I am having the same issue as you were.
    The puppet output would say that the resource was created but the iControl
    debug logs shows that it is being sent an empty SOAP create message.
    I've tried running a simple ruby script using the 10.2.0.2 f5 gem and was
    able to create the node successfully so it looks the Puppet is doing
    something funny.
    Any help would be greatly appreciated.
    Thanks,
    Jeff

    On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 8:31:04 AM UTC+11, Christopher Wood
    wrote:
    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:40:12PM -0800, Nan Liu wrote:
    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Christopher Wood
    wrote:

    (Following up to my own post for posterity's sake, see
    [2][2]xkcd.com/979.)
    Short form: for me this isn't yet as easy as a file
    resource but
    the
    puppetized management payoff will be worth the work. My
    issues
    are most
    likely a reflection of my own puppet/ruby/iControl/SOAP
    skill.
    I am going to explore a personalized set of F5
    types/providers
    that I
    can use without first loading up the wsdl file for every
    involved
    iControl interface, version, and hotfix.

    Points from my various BigIP/puppet experimentations:

    a) The f5-icontrol-10.2.0.2.gem doesn't necessarily work
    with LTM
    11.1.0. (Or I haven't figured it out, also quite likely.)
    This
    could be
    because the gem ships different wsdl files but I couldn't
    get it
    to work
    with later iControl wsdl files anyway.

    b) In LTM 11, F5 deprecated some interfaces so puppet f5
    module
    providers like f5_node are suddenly using deprecated
    interfaces.
    c) Some parts of the iControl api are being updated/fixed
    over
    time, for
    instance the hotfix id 388590 reading "Certificates can now
    successfully
    be updated using the iControl Management::KeyCertificate
    interface",
    see:
    [3][3]
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    d) Judging by my soap-newbie eye the soap4r package appears
    abandonware,
    savon isn't up to complicated data structures and I have
    yet to
    dive
    into handsoap (the starter page says to start with a wsdl,
    see my
    wsdl-tracking issues). Picking the right soap package to
    use is
    likely
    going to be job 1.

    (If the list has any feedback to the above, I'm very much
    all
    ears.)
    Have you tried the v11
    gem?�[4][4]https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306.
    The
    module
    certainly needs to updates against v11 API, but seems like it
    would
    be a
    better starting point.
    Nan�
    I might give that a go. That LTM 11 gem is for 11.1.0 and I'm
    already on
    11.3.0 in the lab due to a key/cert management issue, but the gem should
    be fine if I rebuild it with the wsdl files from my lab device.
    --
    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 [5]puppet-users...@googlegroups.com.
    To post to this group, send email to [6]
    puppet...@googlegroups.com.
    Visit this group at
    [5][7]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
    For more options, visit
    [6][8]https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


    References

    Visible links
    1. mailto:[9]christop...@pobox.com
    2. [10]http://xkcd.com/979
    3.
    [11]
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    4. [12]https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    5. [13]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    6. [14]https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out
    References

    Visible links
    1. javascript:
    2. http://xkcd.com/979
    3.
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    4. https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    5. javascript:
    6. javascript:
    7. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    8. https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out
    9. javascript:
    10. http://xkcd.com/979
    11.
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    12. https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    13. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    14. 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.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
  • Gavin Williams at Oct 1, 2013 at 1:21 pm ⇧
    All

    Just a quick note to confirm that this issue has been fixed in 3.3.1.

    I've just installed 3.3.1 rc2, and have been able to successfully create a
    new iRule on a v11 F5 device using Puppet.

    So now to try and sort out v11 support :)

    Cheers
    Gavin
    On Tuesday, 30 July 2013 07:57:19 UTC+1, Gavin Williams wrote:

    Jeff/Chris/All

    Completely missed this topic when doing my own investigations on this
    issue...

    However the same problem discussed on Puppet-dev<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/puppet-dev/bU0_X_MOiuo>has highlighted the same issue...
    I have therefore raised Issue 21975<http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/21975>to try and get it fixed... Would probably be beneficial if you could
    up-vote it...

    Cheers
    Gavin
    On Tuesday, 18 June 2013 13:56:33 UTC+1, jgm...@gmail.com wrote:

    Hi Chris,

    I think I've narrowed the issue down.

    I'm able to use the 10.2.0.2 f5 gem in a simple script with F5 v11.3.0 to
    create an f5_node so it looks like the F5 is keeping some
    backwards-compatibility.

    The problem is only occurring when the F5 gem is used within puppet. The
    f5 gem is using the ruby 1.8.7's built-in SOAP library that clashes with a
    monkey-patch in Puppet to override the instance_variables method of the
    basic Ruby Object class.

    The patch was introduced in this commit:
    https://github.com/puppetlabs/puppet/commit/1f4e44c26a0d703d1192d26ef8ab555e4508e338
    *lib/puppet/util/monkey_patches.rb*:

    class Object
    alias :puppet_original_instance_variables :instance_variables

    def instance_variables
    puppet_original_instance_variables.map(&:to_sym)
    end
    end


    This in turn clashes with the SOAP class in Ruby 1.8.7:
    lib/soap/mapping/mapping.rb:

    def self.get_attribute(obj, attr_name)
    if obj.is_a?(::Hash)
    obj[attr_name] || obj[attr_name.intern]
    else
    name = XSD::CodeGen::GenSupport.safevarname(attr_name)
    if obj.instance_variables.include?('@' + name)
    obj.instance_variable_get('@' + name)
    elsif ((obj.is_a?(::Struct) or obj.is_a?(Marshallable)) and
    obj.respond_to?(name))
    obj.__send__(name)
    end
    end
    end


    Since Puppet has overridden the instance_variable method to return an
    Array of Symbols, this breaks the obj.instance_variables.include?('@' +
    name) line because it is trying to compare a Symbol with a String which
    will always be false. This in turn causes the F5 gem to send SOAP requests
    to the F5 with nil values so the nodes are never created on the F5.

    This is a pretty strange issue as I thought that there would have been
    other users of the puppetlabs-f5 module with Ruby 1.8.7 and so would have
    hit the same issue, or am I missing something?

    Anyway, it looks like to fix the problem we'll either need to patch the
    F5 gem to override the above method within Ruby or somehow revert the
    monkeypatch in Puppet for the F5 puppet module, unless you can think of a
    cleaner and better solution?

    Jeff
    On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:34:02 PM UTC+10, Christopher Wood wrote:

    Unfortunately due to various non-puppet bigip upgrade issues I haven't
    been able to back to this yet. If I get anything useful working I will
    post.
    On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 03:32:56AM -0700, jgm...@gmail.com wrote:
    Hi Chris,
    How did you go with trying to use the Puppet F5 module with
    v11.3.0? I
    think I am having the same issue as you were.
    The puppet output would say that the resource was created but the iControl
    debug logs shows that it is being sent an empty SOAP create message.
    I've tried running a simple ruby script using the 10.2.0.2 f5 gem and was
    able to create the node successfully so it looks the Puppet is doing
    something funny.
    Any help would be greatly appreciated.
    Thanks,
    Jeff

    On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 8:31:04 AM UTC+11, Christopher Wood
    wrote:
    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:40:12PM -0800, Nan Liu wrote:
    On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Christopher Wood
    wrote:

    (Following up to my own post for posterity's sake, see
    [2][2]xkcd.com/979.)
    Short form: for me this isn't yet as easy as a file
    resource but
    the
    puppetized management payoff will be worth the work. My
    issues
    are most
    likely a reflection of my own puppet/ruby/iControl/SOAP
    skill.
    I am going to explore a personalized set of F5
    types/providers
    that I
    can use without first loading up the wsdl file for every
    involved
    iControl interface, version, and hotfix.

    Points from my various BigIP/puppet experimentations:

    a) The f5-icontrol-10.2.0.2.gem doesn't necessarily work
    with LTM
    11.1.0. (Or I haven't figured it out, also quite likely.)
    This
    could be
    because the gem ships different wsdl files but I couldn't
    get it
    to work
    with later iControl wsdl files anyway.

    b) In LTM 11, F5 deprecated some interfaces so puppet f5
    module
    providers like f5_node are suddenly using deprecated
    interfaces.
    c) Some parts of the iControl api are being updated/fixed
    over
    time, for
    instance the hotfix id 388590 reading "Certificates can
    now
    successfully
    be updated using the iControl Management::KeyCertificate
    interface",
    see:
    [3][3]
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    d) Judging by my soap-newbie eye the soap4r package
    appears
    abandonware,
    savon isn't up to complicated data structures and I have
    yet to
    dive
    into handsoap (the starter page says to start with a wsdl,
    see my
    wsdl-tracking issues). Picking the right soap package to
    use is
    likely
    going to be job 1.

    (If the list has any feedback to the above, I'm very much
    all
    ears.)
    Have you tried the v11
    gem?�[4][4]
    https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306. The
    module
    certainly needs to updates against v11 API, but seems like
    it would
    be a
    better starting point.
    Nan�
    I might give that a go. That LTM 11 gem is for 11.1.0 and I'm
    already on
    11.3.0 in the lab due to a key/cert management issue, but the gem should
    be fine if I rebuild it with the wsdl files from my lab device.
    --
    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 [5]puppet-users...@googlegroups.com.
    To post to this group, send email to [6]
    puppet...@googlegroups.com.
    Visit this group at
    [5][7]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
    For more options, visit
    [6][8]https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


    References

    Visible links
    1. mailto:[9]christop...@pobox.com
    2. [10]http://xkcd.com/979
    3.
    [11]
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    4. [12]https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    5. [13]http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    6. [14]https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out
    References

    Visible links
    1. javascript:
    2. http://xkcd.com/979
    3.
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    4. https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    5. javascript:
    6. javascript:
    7. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    8. https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out
    9. javascript:
    10. http://xkcd.com/979
    11.
    http://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/100/sol14175.html
    12. https://devcentral.f5.com/internal-forums/aff/2306
    13. http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en
    14. 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.
    For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouppuppet-users @
categoriespuppet
postedJan 17, '13 at 9:00p
activeOct 1, '13 at 1:21p
posts13
users4
websitepuppetlabs.com

4 users in discussion

Christopher Wood: 6 posts Nan Liu: 3 posts Jgmchan: 2 posts Gavin Williams: 2 posts

Content

People

Support

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase