Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

More granular settings via "restrict" parameter #84

Closed
nicwaller opened this issue Aug 7, 2013 · 3 comments
Closed

More granular settings via "restrict" parameter #84

nicwaller opened this issue Aug 7, 2013 · 3 comments

Comments

@nicwaller
Copy link

Current implementation of the restrict parameter only enables or disables restrictions on the server, but doesn't allow any customization beyond that.

Please consider either adding a parameter, or modifying the restrict parameter so that this module could be used to configure an NTP server for specific hosts or networks.

For example:

class { 'ntp':
  restrict => [
    'default kod nomodify notrap nopeer noquery',
    '192.168.0.0./16'
  ],
}

As it is right now, I need to provide my own template just to gain this functionality, so this module isn't very useful for me to set up NTP servers. This is especially problematic as I want to include the NTP module for all nodes, then customize accordingly with my hiera database.

@apenney
Copy link
Contributor

apenney commented Aug 8, 2013

Would #87 cover this for you?

@nicwaller
Copy link
Author

@apenney From my brief read over your changeset, that looks exactly right.

Note, however, that this constitutes a change of the public API. If this project uses semantic versioning (http://semver.org/) then this patch will require a bump of the major version number. Otherwise, anybody who depends on the current behavior of $restrict will have problems after upgrading.

@apenney
Copy link
Contributor

apenney commented Aug 8, 2013

We're definitely semver'ing these. We're being fairly aggressive with ntp about adding new features and it's just gone through an enormous amount of change so I'm fine with just merging this and doing another release. Thanks for the feedback!

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants