I vote for <non_descriptive_name_of_function> as a hostname, first of all.
But to keep with the theme of what we have, I vote for engine01 or manager01 or whatever. On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden < [email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 06:05:07AM -0400, Eyal Edri wrote: > > I'm guessing we'd want to give the instance a proper fqdn -> > > "manager01.ovirt.org", "engine.ovirt.org" ? > > I dislike those options. manager01 (to me) implies a cluster where each > managerXX is a node. engine implies there is only one which won't be > true since we'll set up another engine at rackspace. I'd prefer to have > one, but as far as I know this is currently not possible (and maybe due > to latency even a bad idea). > > How about engine.alterway.ovirt.org, engine-alterway.ovirt.org or > alterway-engine.ovirt.org? > _______________________________________________ > Infra mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra > -- /Alexander Rydekull
_______________________________________________ Infra mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
