Hi, I''m using Amazon EC2 and I''m planning to use puppet to deploy automatically my instances, however, I have an issue I can''t rely think through. As most people advised, I used a DNS server (bind to be precise) so that my instances can register to it but also ask this DNS Server the IP of the puppetmaster. However, as this DNS server is also running on Amazon EC2 instance it does not have a "static" IP. So I tried to associate it with an "elastic IP" - ie a static IP but (for unexplained reasons yet) it''s failing. I''ve been fighting with this for a little while and I''m starting to wonder if my all approach is not wrong. If you do deploy on Amazon EC2, how do you address this situation ? -- Romain PELISSE, *"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it" -- Terry Pratchett* http://belaran.eu/wordpress/belaran -- 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 have two options that I would advocate. 1) Have your clients register with your bind server, and have it propagate to a solid DNS distribution layer like dnsmadeeasy. (Which has truly static and well known DNS server addresses, with reasonable uptime history. There are a few players in this space. 2) Have your clients directly register with Amazon''s own Route53 DNS service. It takes care of almost everything, if you are willing to use Amazon''s API. We do both, but now that Amazon has their own service, we lean towards #2, but frankly don''t have enough time to say that Amazon has a DNS offering that is significantly more or less reliable than other DNS servers. Based on their past record of non-DNS uptime, I would guess that relatively speaking they are a very solid choice. Does this help? Cheers, Brian On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 4:08 AM, Romain Pelisse <belaran@gmail.com> wrote:> Hi, > I''m using Amazon EC2 and I''m planning to use puppet to deploy automatically > my instances, however, I have an issue I can''t rely think through. > As most people advised, I used a DNS server (bind to be precise) so that my > instances can register to it but also ask this DNS Server the IP of the > puppetmaster. However, as this DNS server is also running on Amazon EC2 > instance it does not have a "static" IP. So I tried to associate it with an > "elastic IP" - ie a static IP but (for unexplained reasons yet) it''s > failing. I''ve been fighting with this for a little while and I''m starting to > wonder if my all approach is not wrong. > If you do deploy on Amazon EC2, how do you address this situation ? > -- > Romain PELISSE, > "The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist > on coming along and trying to put things in it" -- Terry Pratchett > http://belaran.eu/wordpress/belaran > > -- > 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 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.
This is the approach I''ve taken in the past - and I''ve used a ''static address'' aka elastic IP as you have been trying to do and it has worked. I guess this isn''t the best forum for problems with the Elastic IP service ... but it _should_ work and has worked for me. At the risk of being off topic - what is the problem? If its obvious there are lots of people on the list who probably use Amazon and are general admins who might provide guidance if its a simple problem. The best help however will come from the Amazon EC2 forums most probably: https://forums.aws.amazon.com/forum.jspa?forumID=30 Or call support if you are paying for it :-). There is also the Route 53 service - which doesn''t require a host running bind: http://aws.amazon.com/route53/ The API however is new and the tooling wouldn''t be as freely available as a normal DNS server for dynamic updates. ken. On Feb 23, 9:08 am, Romain Pelisse <bela...@gmail.com> wrote:> Hi, > > I''m using Amazon EC2 and I''m planning to use puppet to deploy automatically > my instances, however, I have an issue I can''t rely think through. > > As most people advised, I used a DNS server (bind to be precise) so that my > instances can register to it but also ask this DNS Server the IP of the > puppetmaster. However, as this DNS server is also running on Amazon EC2 > instance it does not have a "static" IP. So I tried to associate it with an > "elastic IP" - ie a static IP but (for unexplained reasons yet) it''s > failing. I''ve been fighting with this for a little while and I''m starting to > wonder if my all approach is not wrong. > > If you do deploy on Amazon EC2, how do you address this situation ? > > -- > Romain PELISSE, > *"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will > insist on coming along and trying to put things in it" -- Terry Pratchett*http://belaran.eu/wordpress/belaran-- 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.
Hi, Thanks for you reply - actually I simply didn''t know about DNS 53, which perfectly matches my need. So I just subscribe. @Ken: Yes, static ip + bind should work, it''s probably due to an ACL badly setted on my side - but you are right, this is ml is not about bind, so.... On 23 February 2011 12:03, Ken Barber <ken@bob.sh> wrote:> This is the approach I''ve taken in the past - and I''ve used a ''static > address'' aka elastic IP as you have been trying to do and it has > worked. I guess this isn''t the best forum for problems with the > Elastic IP service ... but it _should_ work and has worked for me. > > At the risk of being off topic - what is the problem? If its obvious > there are lots of people on the list who probably use Amazon and are > general admins who might provide guidance if its a simple problem. The > best help however will come from the Amazon EC2 forums most probably: > > https://forums.aws.amazon.com/forum.jspa?forumID=30 > > Or call support if you are paying for it :-). > > There is also the Route 53 service - which doesn''t require a host > running bind: > > http://aws.amazon.com/route53/ > > The API however is new and the tooling wouldn''t be as freely available > as a normal DNS server for dynamic updates. > > ken. > > On Feb 23, 9:08 am, Romain Pelisse <bela...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I''m using Amazon EC2 and I''m planning to use puppet to deploy > automatically > > my instances, however, I have an issue I can''t rely think through. > > > > As most people advised, I used a DNS server (bind to be precise) so that > my > > instances can register to it but also ask this DNS Server the IP of the > > puppetmaster. However, as this DNS server is also running on Amazon EC2 > > instance it does not have a "static" IP. So I tried to associate it with > an > > "elastic IP" - ie a static IP but (for unexplained reasons yet) it''s > > failing. I''ve been fighting with this for a little while and I''m starting > to > > wonder if my all approach is not wrong. > > > > If you do deploy on Amazon EC2, how do you address this situation ? > > > > -- > > Romain PELISSE, > > *"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will > > insist on coming along and trying to put things in it" -- Terry > Pratchett*http://belaran.eu/wordpress/belaran > > -- > 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. > >-- Romain PELISSE, *"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it" -- Terry Pratchett* http://belaran.eu/wordpress/belaran -- 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.
I actually made a type and provider for managing Route 53 entries a while back[1]. I was putting off publishing it until I could rewrite it based on Brices network device framework. If other people people could find something like this useful I can clean it up to work with the current 2.6/2.5 and push to github. [1] http://www.strewth.org/words/2011/02/managing-amazon-route-53-with-puppet/ -- 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.
On 23/02/11 21:34, donavan wrote:> I actually made a type and provider for managing Route 53 entries a > while back[1]. > > I was putting off publishing it until I could rewrite it based on > Brices network device framework. If other people people could find > something like this useful I can clean it up to work with the current > 2.6/2.5 and push to github.I unfortunately didn''t had time to work on my network device framework for more than a month. I expect to resume this work soon :) I''m not sure it will be generic enough to support what you want to do, but that''d be a great opportunity to generalize it :) -- Brice Figureau My Blog: http://www.masterzen.fr/ -- 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.
On Feb 23, 1:25 pm, Brice Figureau <brice-pup...@daysofwonder.com> wrote:> I unfortunately didn''t had time to work on my network device framework > for more than a month. I expect to resume this work soon :)I know what that''s like. That aws code has been sitting since the beginning of January.> I''m not sure it will be generic enough to support what you want to do, > but that''d be a great opportunity to generalize it :)Sure. I recall a lot of overlap in the NetworkDevice class that you were basing on. The thing that really killed my provider was serialized actions at internet latencies. The paradigm of batch fetching the status, updating hashed instances, then flushing changes seemed to be a smarter way forward. Route 53 also happened to map on to your "network" components as well. I have sets of credentials with many domains (devices), with many hosts (interfaces). -- 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.