[nycbug-talk] Sanity check on new naming scheme

[Francisco Reyes]

Isaac Levy writes:

> I'd typically rather name the machines uniquely, 
>(sparrow.hostname.com, crow.hostname.com) instead of functionally, (e.g. 
>www2.hostname.com, www3.hostname.com).

One possible problem with that approach would be applications that try to 
reach machines by name. If a machine is repurposed and you did not use 
CNAMES or forgot to repoint a CNAME you could have programs reach a  machine 
that is no longer doing what the program expects. 
Example: You have some type of "inbox" machine that gets data through FTP 
from process X. Target machine for process X is re-purposed, but it also 
accepts FTP with the same user/password. Now  process X is silently broken 
because the sender is succeding on FTPing, but whatever was supposed to 
process the incoming files is looking somewhere else.

I guess that with the proper change management any method will work.
I think on a company with weak change management it may be easier to have 
something fail when a machine is repurposed and renamed.