350-401 · Question #1230
What is a common trait between Ansible and Chef?
The correct answer is B. Both are used for mutable infrastructure.. Both Ansible and Chef are widely used configuration management tools primarily designed to manage and modify existing systems, making them suitable for mutable infrastructure environments.
Question
Options
- ABoth rely on a declarative approach.
- BBoth are used for mutable infrastructure.
- CBoth require a client to be installed on hosts.
- DBoth rely on NETCONF.
How the community answered
(23 responses)- A4% (1)
- B96% (22)
Why each option
Both Ansible and Chef are widely used configuration management tools primarily designed to manage and modify existing systems, making them suitable for mutable infrastructure environments.
While both can be used with a declarative approach, Ansible is inherently more declarative, whereas Chef allows for more imperative scripting within its recipes, making 'both rely on a declarative approach' less universally defining than their mutable infrastructure use.
Both Ansible and Chef are commonly used in scenarios where infrastructure is mutable, meaning servers and network devices are configured, patched, and updated in place over their lifecycle, rather than being replaced with new instances upon every change.
Ansible is agentless, relying on SSH, while Chef requires a client (Chef-client) to be installed and running on each managed node, making this statement incorrect.
Ansible and Chef are general-purpose configuration management tools that do not exclusively rely on NETCONF; they use various protocols like SSH, WinRM, and their own agents for communication, although they can integrate with NETCONF-enabled devices.
Concept tested: Configuration management tool characteristics
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.