Compare agent vs. agentless orchestration tools (Chef, Puppet, Ansible, SaltStack)

📘CCNP Encore (350-401-ENCORE-v1.1)


Orchestration Tools Overview

Orchestration tools are software systems that help IT teams automate configuration, deployment, and management of network devices, servers, and applications. Instead of doing tasks manually (like updating a server or pushing a configuration), these tools allow you to write instructions once and then apply them automatically across many devices.

Some popular orchestration tools include:

  • Chef
  • Puppet
  • Ansible
  • SaltStack

A key concept in these tools is how they communicate with devices:

  1. Agent-based: Each device runs a small software called an agent, which receives instructions from a central server.
  2. Agentless: Devices do not run any agent. The orchestration tool connects directly to devices over protocols like SSH or API.

Agent-based Orchestration Tools

How they work

  • You install a small program (agent) on every server or network device.
  • A central server (called “master” or “controller”) sends instructions to these agents.
  • Agents perform the tasks on their device and report back the results to the central server.

Examples

  1. Chef
    • Uses Ruby-based recipes to define configuration.
    • Agent on each node checks the central Chef server and applies changes.
    • Good for complex server setups, like installing multiple packages and services.
  2. Puppet
    • Uses manifests (written in Puppet’s language) to define desired state.
    • Agent contacts the Puppet master periodically to check for updates.
    • Good for large-scale infrastructures with many servers.

Advantages

  • Reliable: The agent ensures the task is applied correctly.
  • Continuous enforcement: Agent can periodically check and fix configurations.
  • Good for complex and long-term management.

Disadvantages

  • You must install and manage the agent on every device.
  • More resource-intensive on devices.
  • Can be harder to quickly deploy on temporary or cloud devices.

Agentless Orchestration Tools

How they work

  • No agent is installed on devices.
  • The orchestration tool connects directly using SSH, API calls, or WinRM.
  • Executes instructions immediately on target devices.

Examples

  1. Ansible
    • Uses playbooks (YAML files) to define tasks.
    • Connects via SSH to Linux servers or via WinRM to Windows servers.
    • Commonly used for network device automation and cloud deployments.
  2. SaltStack
    • Can work in agent or agentless mode.
    • Agentless mode uses SSH for Linux and WinRM for Windows.
    • Agent mode uses Salt Minion installed on devices for faster and large-scale automation.

Advantages

  • No need to install software on devices.
  • Easier to start automation quickly, especially in cloud or temporary environments.
  • Lightweight and simple for small-to-medium networks.

Disadvantages

  • Less control for continuous monitoring (unless you run it frequently).
  • May be slower for very large infrastructures compared to agent-based.

Agent vs Agentless – Quick Comparison Table

FeatureAgent-based (Chef, Puppet)Agentless (Ansible, SaltStack)
Software on devicesRequires agentNo agent needed
CommunicationAgent contacts serverServer connects directly (SSH/API)
Configuration enforcementContinuous, periodic checksRuns on demand
ComplexityMore setup initiallyEasy to start
PerformanceGood for large, complex infraLightweight, fast for small-to-medium infra
Use caseLarge data centers, persistent serversNetwork devices, cloud servers, temporary environments

Key Exam Notes

  1. Know which tools are agent-based and which are agentless:
    • Agent-based: Chef, Puppet
    • Agentless: Ansible (primarily), SaltStack (can be both)
  2. Understand communication methods:
    • Agent-based: agents pull configurations from server.
    • Agentless: server pushes configurations via SSH/API.
  3. Be able to compare advantages/disadvantages for different IT environments:
    • Large, persistent servers → agent-based may be better.
    • Rapid, temporary deployments → agentless is faster and simpler.
  4. Real IT examples:
    • Chef: Automatically install software, configure multiple web servers consistently.
    • Puppet: Ensure all servers in a data center always have correct firewall and security settings.
    • Ansible: Update network switch configurations or push software updates to cloud servers without installing anything.
    • SaltStack: Monitor servers for changes or apply quick fixes without installing agents (agentless mode).

Summary for Exam

  • Agent-based tools require software on devices; agentless tools do not.
  • Chef and Puppet = agent-based; Ansible = agentless; SaltStack = flexible.
  • Agent-based is strong for continuous management, agentless is strong for quick, lightweight automation.
  • Know how they connect (agent pull vs server push) and when each is preferred.

Buy Me a Coffee