I.T. Security and Linux Administration

Jul 30 2011   8:31PM GMT

Central Management: Worth I.T. or Not?



Posted by: Eric Hansen
Tags:
Central
management
single point of failure
SPOF

I’ve always been one to dislike central management systems. Monitoring systems are nice. If there wasn’t a central system to maintain servers it would make life a lot more busy. However, if you have a cluster and you decide to manage all the slaves, as well as the master, via control panel only, there’s one major flaw about this. That is…

…what if that single point fails? If you have SSH enabled on the server, that’s great. Just SSH Into the server, restart the service or figure out why it failed, and go from there. But, on the other hand, if you disable SSH, there’s no way to access the server short of physically going to it, which isn’t possible if your data center is located half-way across the world.

There is a reason why people tend to not implement single-points of failure in their infrastructure. Not saying there’s no purposes to it, but it should be used with caution. While yes, having a back door open to the server isn’t exactly the smartest choice, there’s always ways around it. I think if you do go with a plan such as single point, you should make sure that multiple point is just not feasible. Perhaps there’s too much eavesdropping going on throughout the network, or even the protocol/system/etc… you are doing this for doesn’t support it.

 Comment on this Post

 
There was an error processing your information. Please try again later.
Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.
Send me notifications when other members comment.

REGISTER or login:

Forgot Password?
By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Forgot Password

No problem! Submit your e-mail address below. We'll send you an e-mail containing your password.

Your password has been sent to: