Question

Difficulty: MediumCapabilities of Configuration Management Mechanisms (Puppet, Chef, Ansible)

An engineer is organizing the network automation architecture for an enterprise deployment. Match each configuration management framework to the combination of operational architecture, primary transport protocol, and configuration file format it utilizes.

  • AnsibleAgentless push model using SSH or NETCONF transport with YAML playbooks
  • PuppetAgent-based pull model using TCP port 8140 transport with Puppet DSL manifests
  • ChefAgent-based pull model using TCP port 443 transport with Ruby DSL recipes

Answer

Ansible pairs with the agentless push model using SSH/NETCONF and YAML playbooks. Puppet pairs with the agent-based pull model using TCP port 8140 and Puppet DSL manifests. Chef pairs with the agent-based pull model using TCP port 443 and Ruby DSL recipes.
Each tool is correctly matched based on its core architecture: Ansible is agentless (push, SSH/NETCONF, YAML), Puppet relies on agents over TCP 8140 (pull, Puppet DSL manifests), and Chef relies on agents over TCP 443 (pull, Ruby DSL recipes).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the operational mode and file type for Ansible.
Ansible does not require software agents on managed nodes; it pushes configuration over SSH/NETCONF using YAML files.
Ansible relies on standard management protocols natively supported on network devices.
2
Identify the operational mode, port, and file type for Puppet.
Puppet agents periodically pull configuration state over TCP port 8140 using manifests compiled in Puppet DSL.
Puppet uses a dedicated master-agent communication port (8140) and standard manifest files.
3
Identify the operational mode, port, and file type for Chef.
Chef client agents pull cookbooks/recipes written in Ruby DSL over HTTPS (TCP port 443).
Chef relies on standard Web HTTPS communication between nodes and the Chef Server.

Key Concept

Configuration Management Mechanism Capabilities (Ansible vs Puppet vs Chef)
Rate this question