Skip to main content
Warning This document has not been updated for a while now. It may be out of date.
Last updated: 9 Jun 2020

govuk-aws: 6. Puppet architecture

Date: 2017-07-04




For our initial iteration we should discuss whether we use a Puppetmaster architecture, or use a masterless Puppet approach.

Using the former approach, we would have to take the following into account:

  • We would set up a Puppetmaster for the rest of the provisioned instances to connect to
  • We would deploy new Puppet code to this machine only
  • It matches our current architecture and approach
  • We would need to take into account certificate management
  • Each machine would "check in" to the Puppetmaster every 30 minutes, ensuring a consistent state

If we used a masterless approach:

  • We would need to deploy Puppet code and secrets to each instance that we provision
  • We would run Puppet only when we deploy new code
  • It differs from our current approach
  • We would not have to manage a Puppetmaster which means no single point of failure


Use a Puppetmaster to not diverge from current architecture in the initial iteration.


We may suffer from having to manage two Puppetmasters while we run in two environments.

There is additional work around the management of a Puppetmaster.

However, this matches our current working architecture so it means that we're more in line of doing a straight "lift and shift". In theory deployments would be more straight forward to manage as we would not have to create a new deployment process, instead we could amend the current deployment process.