I have no problem developing a personal relationship[1] with hardware that has a logical name.
My philosophy for system design, in all areas, is to plan for when something fails. Not IF, WHEN. It WILL happen. There is no question of that. So, when you're called at 3am to fix a problem, and you're half awake, I'd rather not have to remember that billybob is a webserver and bubba is the mail server. I would LOVE to be able to "name" my servers. Its just not practical in a business envrionment when different admins in different locations (and who speak different languages) have to do cross support, its just not a wise business decision. -------------------------------------------------------------- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. [1] No, not THAT kind of personal relationship > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 6:32 AM > To: NT 2000 Discussions > Subject: Re: Desktop naming conventions > > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 08:30:44AM -0500, Roger Seielstad said: > > > > 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? > > There are two ways of looking at this: > > 1) My name is Adam-Smith, and I am also known as an > Information Technology > Officer. I am 23 years old, living in South Australia. > > 2) My name is ITO23SA, and I am also known as Adam-Smith. > > > I agree with your points, however I am not arguing that > servers shouldn't have logical names. You'll find that most > routers around the Internet have geographical & numeric > names, but then many of them have 'illogical' names as well, > but these are often designated as secondary names. > > After re-reading my email I realize I may have sounded > anti-logical-names; I am not. But I do think that the > addition of illogical names into a network also brings less > complexity. > > I also think that that by naming your hardware, your job > becomes less robotic. I think you get to know your hardware > by name, just as you get to know people. > > Typically, if I change jobs, my name doesn't change, just my > title. The concept of giving your hardware a name is the same as this. > > > -- > 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 PROTECTED]
