[135530] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Network Naming
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Cutler James R)
Wed Jan 26 10:07:02 2011
From: Cutler James R <james.cutler@consultant.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D3FA3DE.7040809@tiggee.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:06:05 -0500
To: nanog group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> I recommend documenting your naming standard and getting buy in across =
your organization before you put it into place.=20
This is a necessary condition for successful deployment, but not part of =
the schema.
On Jan 25, 2011, at 11:32 PM, David Miller wrote:
> On 1/25/2011 8:15 PM, Gary Steers wrote:
>> James makes a good point...
>>=20
>>> Pick a scheme which:
>>> 1. Uses simple memorable names.
>>> 2. Makes business sense to you.
>>> 3. You know how to manage (database, publication, updates, etc.
>>> If I had to weight these criteria, I would weight 3 most heavily.
>>=20
>> The other key thing to bear in mind is consistency and scalability... =
(i.e. design a scope that can grow with your network and needs
>>=20
>> {interface/server}.{router/vmhost}.{city}.{country}.example.net
>>=20
>> The other thing that doesn't really have any defined list is {city}, =
Some people prefer 2 letter, some 3 letter, some people use airport =
codes etc..
>>=20
>=20
> The naming schemes that I have developed that needed to be upgraded in =
the past have almost always bumped up against scale, so build in much =
larger scale than you ever think that you will need from the beginning. =
You have X devices now in Y locations, but your naming scheme should =
scale to X^Z devices in Y^Z locations.
>=20
> I agree that for network gear, this is is a good place to start =
(slightly simplified here from above):
>=20
> {interface}.{host}.{location}.example.net
>=20
>=20
> - Location
> I personally prefer UN LOCODEs for country / city. The UN already =
went to the trouble of giving a unique code to every country/city. Why =
do I use them? LON makes perfect sense as London, England... until you =
have devices in London, KY and London, OH (the LOCODES for these Londons =
are GB LON, US LDN, US LOZ). In my opinion, airport codes (while =
certainly unique) work well in some locales and not so well in others =
(so, I don't use them, YMMV).
>=20
> - Host
> I prefer, like many do, an acronym denoting the primary function of =
the device. ES (edge switch), AR (access router), CR (core router), =
etc... whatever your internal terminology is. If you will *ever* have =
more than 10 of a device anywhere, then I would recommend that you =
number out of double digits (more than 100, then out of triple =
digits...). That way in a sorted list AR03 will be right between AR02 =
and AR04, where you expect it to be, instead of between AR29 and AR30. =
Standardizing on number length also limits ambiguity in pressure =
situations and/or over noisy or less reliable communication channels.
>=20
> - Interface
> Port names vary on gear from different vendors. {interface type} - =
{selector}* ... where selector repeats ordered from highest to lowest =
level of granularity (e.g. rack/slot/module/port) is what I use. You =
should use whatever makes sense to you. Are interface speeds or vlans =
important to your infrastructure? If so, then include them where =
appropriate. Unless you have exactly the same gear everywhere, you are =
going to have to be flexible here.
>=20
> I recommend documenting your naming standard and getting buy in across =
your organization before you put it into place. By giving names to =
these devices/interfaces at all, you are exposing information to the =
world. What makes perfect sense to engineering and support may give =
security, management, and/or marketing heart palpitations.
>=20
> Just my $0.02 (probably overvalued).
>=20
>> Hope that helps!
>>=20
>> G
>>=20
>> ---
>> Gary Steers
>> Sharedband NOC/3rd Line Support
>> Sharedband
>> UK: +44 (0)1473 287207
>> US: +1 206 420 0240
>> E: gary.steers@sharedband.com
>>=20
>> We have a new support system - http://support.sharedband.com
>>=20
>>=20
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Cutler James R [mailto:james.cutler@consultant.com]
>> Sent: 25 January 2011 22:41
>> To: nanog group
>> Subject: Re: Network Naming
>>=20
>> On Jan 25, 2011, at 3:50 PM, Nick Olsen wrote:
>>=20
>>> Whats the rule of thumb for naming gear these days
>>> (routers,switches...etc). Or is there one?
>> Pick a scheme which:
>> 1. Uses simple memorable names.
>> 2. Makes business sense to you.
>> 3. You know how to manage (database, publication, updates, etc.
>>=20
>> If I had to weight these criteria, I would weight 3 most heavily.
>>=20
>>=20
>> James R. Cutler
>> james.cutler@consultant.com
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>=20
>=20
James R. Cutler
james.cutler@consultant.com
