Static routes

Hi,

Are there any plans to add the capability of adding static routes to
network interfaces in foreman? Or is there something that I'm missing that
already allows this?
It would be nice if these could be configured as part of a subnet.

At the moment, I'm facing the unpleasant idea of adding those into the
kickstart template with some horrible if ip ~= mess to determine them.

J

> At the moment, I'm facing the unpleasant idea of adding those into the
> kickstart template with some horrible if ip ~= mess to determine them.

Why dont you introduce a host parameter for that?

··· -- Later, Lukas #lzap Zapletal

Hi Jamese,
With the introduction of the "per-subnet parameters" feature in the 1.12
release, it should be much more easier to implement static routes
configuration at the template level. I'm waiting for 1.12 GA to test a
solution.
http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/3582

··· Il giorno mercoledì 5 agosto 2015 17:40:45 UTC+2, jamese ha scritto: > > Hi, > > Are there any plans to add the capability of adding static routes to > network interfaces in foreman? Or is there something that I'm missing that > already allows this? > It would be nice if these could be configured as part of a subnet. > > At the moment, I'm facing the unpleasant idea of adding those into the > kickstart template with some horrible if ip ~= mess to determine them. > > J >

Well, the issue is that the route(s) should ideally be defined against a
network interface, so I'd have to represent the interface/subnet and the
routes in a param somehow. It just feels a bit messy to me.
I'm trying to set our system up to be as automated and intuitive as
possible.
In an ideal utopic world, I'd like to see extra params on the network
interface config in foreman which lets me define multiple static routes
against a subnet. Those can then be processed by the prov templates
accordingly.
We have several hundred VLAN's in our estate, so being able to define
static routes against the subnets would mean that we would just need to add
them once to foreman and every build would just do the right thing for any
future built hosts.
I know it's not something that would be magicked up overnight, but just
thought I'd post about it in case it hadn't been considered before.

I'm certainly open to suggestions on how to work around this in a nice
way. I'm classing myself as a beginner with Foreman as I've only really
been setting it up and using it this week, so I'm sure there are things
that I'm not aware of that could solve this problem elegantly for me.

J

Correction to:
"In an ideal utopic world, I'd like to see extra params on the network
interface config in foreman which lets me define multiple static routes
against a subnet. Those can then be processed by the prov templates
accordingly."

What I meant was, the static routes should be defined against the subnet in
the gui and then utilised by the host network interfaces assigned to that
subnet. It would also be nice to be able to define static routes against a
network interface individually, not defined against the subnet for the
unique slowflake servers.