Skip to content

Conversation

@bontreger
Copy link
Contributor

This topic has come up a few times in the past week around managing multiple credentials on a single job template. Adding this rule to be explicit on one-to-one inventory/credential/job template mapping

Copy link
Contributor

@djdanielsson djdanielsson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we need to probably create a new section for AAP related practices.

@bontreger
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think inventory/credential mapping still makes sense in a CLI implementation only manner. You can get clever with defining connection details in an inventory, and while possible, it's a slippery slope and unmaintainable long-term

@ericzolf
Copy link
Contributor

I don't agree with the way this is formulated: it would be for me completely valid to have Linux and Windows hosts in the same inventory, and they would have different machine credentials, albeit at the group level probably. Also the fact that you express the recommendation with a "should" is in my eyes a bad sign, that means you're not sure it applies always.

Shouldn't the recommendation actually be to not use individual credentials? This can be easily argumented against, due to maintenance effort or when using an external vault, performance impact because you'd need to query its API individually for each host (a colleague heard this actually from a vault provider employee, can't remember which one).

And this recommendation is independent from the execution place, AAP or CLI.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants