Re: My reason to upgrade 10.0 to 10.1



houghi wrote:
Vahis wrote:
Naming computers is a more wide and complex thing than one might think.
At home it's no biggie, but take an office building with a thousand or
more users.

I have read RFCs about it. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1178.html
Intersting read and might makes you realize that you do things wrong.
:-)

Yeah, that's one of them I've seen. Things like those should be taken
into account more than they are now.

My two machines are called penne and pizza. Pizza is the flat one that
runs Debian (Portable T2130CD Toshiba)

We used to have Sun pizza boxes way back when I was selling them.

I've had one here called tester. I gave it the factory source to chew
with Zen, so I guess I'll rename it to factory :)


The computers often stay while the employees leave...

That is what has been mentioned in the RFC as well. Read it. ;-)

I have, I didn't make that up myself...


I've read some nice articles about this and I think 10.1 naming is quite
OK, It'll apparently cause no trouble :)

No idea how they do it.

In Redmond they've had this naming idea for long...

No matter what the chances are still that you
get two identical names (unless DHCP does this for you) and this might
be ahrder to detect, because it happens so seldom.

Like you saw there I try to avoid confusing in ssh:ing my machines, so
the names are intended to be descriptive. That funny name will be
changed to something I know for sure :)

Reminds me of a networkcard somebody bought in the US and used it in
Belgium. It had the same MAC adress as one they already used and took a
while to find the cause.

I've heard of cases like that.
I don't fancy using MAC addresses in like firewall rules, they can
easily be falsified.

Vahis
--
http://waxborg.servepics.com
http://waxborg.servepics.com/mobile/articles/vmware.html
http://waxborg.servepics.com/English/Linux/susemultimedia.en.html
http://waxborg.servepics.com/English/Bikes/Trackdays/index.html
.