[123815] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Network Naming Conventions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Kristoff)
Tue Mar 16 12:18:24 2010
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 11:17:31 -0500
From: John Kristoff <jtk@cymru.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <C0A98BB6DAFAAB46A78BBA2C51B98F3E01079C91@nexus.nexicomgroup.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 10:47:28 -0500
"Paul Stewart" <pstewart@nexicomgroup.net> wrote:
> Going forward, I'd like to examine a better method to identify the
> devices.... does anyone have published standards on what they use or
> that of other networks and maybe even why they chose those methods?
Bottom line is there is probably no perfect naming scheme, but some do
suck more than others. This came up on another list and resulted in a
long thread, where lots of people still prefer cutesy names, but I'd
recommend against them. Here is point where I contributed so I don't
need to repeat it here. An ISP's naming scheme may differ slightly
due to the multitude of interface conventions you might want a name
to associate with, but you'll get the gist of my stance. Then browse
forward and backward to see what others had to say.
<http://listserv.educause.edu/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind1002&L=SECURITY&T=0&F=&S=&P=49637>
John
