Robert Lazzurs wrote:
Thinking about this in terms of what is 'really' there...
The power control interface is just an entry of what address to
connect to for controlling the power for a system so it should not be
in there and I don't think we should be taking DHCP information from
there, this seems 'unclean'.
However the DRAC and iLO cards are network interfaces on the systems
from a hardware point of view so either these should be treated as
systems them selfs or as network interfaces of the parent system. Now
this is what I am doing at the moment because I figured in the future
cobbler could host 'images' for upgrading devices like these, switches
or routers lets say. This makes a lot of sense to me and fits in the
current model, what do other people think?
Cobbler can host images for upgrades, in fact, and already does in some
ways -- HP and Dell (server) stuff is Linux kernel+initrd, for
instance. Very nice.
I think I kind of like the idea of treating them as systems, as they
really do run an independent OS. The question is the workflow to
configure that, is it weird and/or kludgy?
In a blade environment, probably not.. the management blade is another
system, right? Seems fair. You'd just want a way to say who the
controller was.
Seems fair.
--Michael