while i'm not particularly fond of our naming conventions here, but it works for the most part.
Example: LFI-xx-xxxxxx - LFI = langley something or other WS - work station FS - File server xx - etc and the last string would be like "1cs131" specifiying which squadron "1 CS" and the number is for the computer itself. Problem is, when you have over 1,000 machines, its hard to keep track of which computer belongs to Bob. :p shane -----Original Message----- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 8:31 AM To: NT 2000 Discussions Subject: RE: Desktop naming conventions I'd couldn't disagree more, assuming that the standard naming convention is reasonably well designed. For servers, we use the 3 letter city code, followed by a set of descriptive abbreviations and an ordinal number. I can pretty much guarantee that any reasonably intelligent[1] observer would have no problem knowing or at least guessing what the server does: ATLDC2 Atlanta DC #2 ATLPSDEV1 Atlanta PeopleSoft Development envrionment DALEXMB1 Dallas Exchange Mailbox Server #1 CONEXCON1 Concord Exchange Connector Server #1 Now - we have also used common names for other boxes as well. What are Tungsten, Beryllium and Cerium? How about Socrates, Copernicus and Kepler? The last 3 are my personal workstation and 2 servers at the house. When you have 5 machines, its easy to use that kind of naming standard. When you manage 200+ in 9 different locations with a staff of 6, that becomes a much less optimal solution. Roger -------------------------------------------------------------- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. [1] Probably any life form higher than SSM[2] [2] Strategically Shaved Monkey > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 5:27 PM > To: NT 2000 Discussions > Subject: Re: Desktop naming conventions > > > On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 08:21:22AM -0600, Fanta, Ken said: > > > Another example is SSUNH-TS1. The S stands for Sever. SUN is the > > location Sun Prairie, H in this example is Headquarters and > the TS1 is > > the server name in this case Terminal Server 1 > > How many locations/machines are we talking about here? Do > you give your servers "real names" as well? > > If I said to you "Ken, can you go and check out the web > server, it appears to be down," how would you know what to > connect to off the top of your head? What if you got > confused, because you weren't sure if you needed to connect > to SSUNH-WB6 or SSUNH-WB2? > > What if you called them "Parry" and "Worzel?" I bet you'd > remember which one had which service. We're not robots, > we're humans, and that's one reason I don't believe in these > 'logical' naming conventions. > > If you were instructed to repair a web server, physically, > you would probably have to look it up in your register anyway > to find out which server you're supposed to be fixing, > because it's pretty unlikely your brain is going to remember > what does what, unless you're working on the same servers constantly. > > Considering it's more likely that you're going to be > connecting to a server remotely rather than physically, > wouldn't it make more sense to minimize the amount of > cross-referencing you need to do, by making the names easier > to remember? Your system means you can find a server > physically really easily, and that's great, but what about > finding it remotely? One of my friends works for a major ISP > in Australia here, and they have hundreds of servers and > routers, all with 'illogical' names. It's interesting to > note, however, that he can identify various routers and > servers around that network (a vast majority of them) by > their 'illogical name.' Had they followed the alternative > naming conventions for their routers and servers, I'm sure > he'd remember only a small portion of what he had in his network. > > > Even if you stuck to a sort of naming convention, eg. Naming > all the servers in Sun Prairie after the Simpsons (or > whatever) would still "group" them as families, just like > your naming convention does. But what it doesn't do is make > them easily remembered from a remote location when you're > trying to administer. > > If I had just connected to "SWASH-FB6" all day and then a > week later I had to go back, without checking my diary or > other logs, it's unlikely I'd remember that combination of > letters. But if I remembered the name of the server was > "Jackie-O," "Targus" or "Megatron," I'd probably remember > which one I was working on all day. > > > This convention lets me know where that machine is at any > given time > > just by looking at the name. > > How much physical access do you really need? > > > -- > Adam Smith > Information Technology Officer > SAGE Automation Ltd. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.sageautomation.com > > ------ > You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% > ------ You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe send a blank email to %%email.unsub%% ------ You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
