[166443] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Network configuration archiving
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Erik Muller)
Thu Oct 24 23:05:27 2013
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 23:05:07 -0400
From: Erik Muller <erikm@buh.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20131024212526.GC14735@Eleanor.local>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 10/24/13 17:25 , Job Snijders wrote:
> Some might say "it took ages to get rancid to do kinda what we want!",
> but not all software ages well. One might work in environments where
> archived configurations are needed to even start provisioning, one
> might desire a separation between actual config and transcient data.
Rancid certainly has its warts, but other than needing to test, pull hair,
and patch things for new OS/platform deployments, it still generally Just
Works once you have it installed, IME... and references like
http://www.shrubbery.net/rancid/SteveSmithFedora15.pdf that are a bit dated
still work well as a guide for deployment on more recent server OSes.
> As I am evaluating our path forward, I've compiled a small list of open
> source projects with some biased highlights. Your feedback is most
> welcome, maybe I missed some interesting projects or developments. I
> would also be very interested in what other operators seek in a network
> config/state archive tool.
I can't claim any knowledge of its actual functionality, but I've also heard of
NOC Project - http://nocproject.org/
From the docs, it seems like it's trying to be more of an all-in-one
do-everything package than just an archiving tool, but it could be worth
investigating. It claims support for a wide array of kit, and seems to
have a non-trivial user base.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd be interested to hear if your
evaluation determines that there is a R,RAN*ID out there that we've been
overlooking.
-e
