# Naming Scheme - Rev 1 **URL:** \ **Category:** Infrastructure\ **Created:** [December 9, 2020, 7:34pm UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73 "2020-12-09T19:34:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![schlitzered](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/schlitzered/32/48_2.png) [@schlitzered](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/schlitzered)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 12:13am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/21 "2020-12-10T00:13:56Z")
why even count like 01, or 001, why not just start with “1”. with this you will never have the problems like “ohh we use $NUM digits” but now we need one more digit. also makes scripting way easier. ---
**Author:** ![neil](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/neil/32/34_2.png) [@neil](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/neil)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 12:16am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/22 "2020-12-10T00:16:36Z")
because as soon as you get to needing 10 of _something_ you’re fucked and so are all your scripts. Plan arity from the beginning. It’s not a big deal. ---
**Author:** ![schlitzered](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/schlitzered/32/48_2.png) [@schlitzered](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/schlitzered)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 12:23am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/23 "2020-12-10T00:23:54Z")
i do not see why a fixed length has to be used at all. why is [hostname-01.example.com](http://hostname-01.example.com) better then [hostname-1.example.com](http://hostname-1.example.com). as soon as you hit 9, you overflow and use 10. using a variable length is IMHO more flexible, as well as more natural. or what is the advantage of a fix number of digits? ---
**Author:** ![label](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c5a1d2/32.png) [@label](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/label)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 12:42am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/24 "2020-12-10T00:42:11Z")
Yes, you should always plan parity from the very beginning. I cannot tell you how many times at my last company that this sort of thing screwed us over after everyone ignored my suggestion of using a XXX digit scheme. ---
**Author:** ![rsc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a5b964/32.png) [@rsc](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/rsc)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 12:46am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/25 "2020-12-10T00:46:48Z")
For external, I would like to additionally propose `debuginfo.rockylinux.org` for debuginfo/debugsource RPM packages. ---
**Author:** ![schlitzered](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/schlitzered/32/48_2.png) [@schlitzered](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/schlitzered)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 1:03am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/26 "2020-12-10T01:03:04Z")
another remark regarding the suggested naming scheme: [dev-us1-01.ci.rockylinux.org](http://dev-us1-01.ci.rockylinux.org): ## ID xxx - unique id env - (dev, test, stage, prod) dcc - datacenter code technically speaking these all should be subdomains. so “dev-us1-01.ci.rockylinuxorg” would become. ci-1.dev.us1.rockylinuxorg. this scheme will allow to use DNS service discovery, and always send local client, to the closest server. for example. FreeIPA Clients use DNS service discovery for to find FreeIPA servers. with the suggest scheme “[dev-us1-01.ci.rockylinux.org](http://dev-us1-01.ci.rockylinux.org)” you will never be able to force a IPA client to use the closest IPA server. with the scheme suggested above a DNS discovery request for a IPA kerberos will do a SRV lookup on \_kerberos.\_tcp.ci.rockylinux.org the result might look like this: \_kerberos.\_tcp.ci.rockylinux.org IN SRV 0 100 88 [dev-eu1-01.ipa.rockylinux.org](http://dev-eu1-01.ipa.rockylinux.org) \_kerberos.\_tcp.ci.rockylinux.org IN SRV 0 100 88 [dev-us1-01.ipa.rockylinux.org](http://dev-us1-01.ipa.rockylinux.org) \_kerberos.\_tcp.ci.rockylinux.org IN SRV 0 100 88 [dev-jp1-01.ipa.rockylinux.org](http://dev-jp1-01.ipa.rockylinux.org) so the client will talk to a random host from the result set. which is no fun with IdM. but if you make the “env” and “dcc” a subdomain. you will be able to always hit the closest IPA server, and get fast results. example: client: [ci-1.dev.eu1.rockylinux.com](http://ci-1.dev.eu1.rockylinux.com): request: SRV \_kerberos.\_tcp.dev.eu1.rockylinux.com: result: \_kerberos.\_tcp.dev.eu1.rockylinux.com IN SRV 0 100 88 [ipa-1.prod.eu1.rockylinux.com](http://ipa-1.prod.eu1.rockylinux.com) \_kerberos.\_tcp.dev.eu1.rockylinux.com IN SRV 0 200 88 [ipa-1.prod.us1.rockylinux.com](http://ipa-1.prod.us1.rockylinux.com) \_kerberos.\_tcp.dev.eu1.rockylinux.com IN SRV 0 300 88 [ipa-1.prod.jp1.rockylinux.com](http://ipa-1.prod.jp1.rockylinux.com) watch the different priority in the result, the client will always us the ipa server with the best priority, and will only fall back to a lower priority host in case the nothing else is available. the fun fact is that you do not have to set these TXT/SRV records for every subdomain. ipa client will automatically start stripping subdomains if no result is found, like: \_kerberos.\_tcp.dev.eu1.rockylinux.com \_kerberos.\_tcp.eu1.rockylinux.com \_kerberos.\_tcp.rockylinux.com all this is not possible if you have a “flat” DNS structure. another advantage of having the “dcc” as a subdomain is that you technically could run a dedicated DNS master for each “dcc”, which would allow you to make DNS changes independently from other "dcc"´s ---
**Author:** ![RNM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e9a140/32.png) [@RNM](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/RNM)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 4:14am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/27 "2020-12-10T04:14:56Z")
+1 more for [planet.rockylinux.org](http://planet.rockylinux.org), dev, media and user who have websites now are talking about rocky linux. They can send rss feed to planet 👍 ---
**Author:** ![kevinsumner](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/kevinsumner/32/9_2.png) [@kevinsumner](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/kevinsumner)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 4:45am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/28 "2020-12-10T04:45:53Z")
+1 for using domain separation, such as @schlitzered recommended. It also allows breaking a subdomain into its own zone to move SOA around and whatnot for better scale or locality. Also, regardless of whether we do internal/external DNS views, I think it’s wise to keep the internal names in subdomains rather than [rockylinux.org](http://rockylinux.org) directly. Personally, though, I don’t see views bringing anything to the table. They’re annoying to work with and make some things, like DNSSEC, more complicated. ---
**Author:** ![morsik](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/morsik/32/54_2.png) [@morsik](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/morsik)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 10:52am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/29 "2020-12-10T10:52:54Z")
+1 for domain separation too, but fixing again, since this should work from biggest to smallest, so instead pf proposed by @schlitzered: `ci-1.dev.us1.rockylinuxorg.` If should be: `ci-1.us1.dev.rockylinux.org.` and in such case, why do we even care about dash? Then it would be just: `ci1.us1.dev.rockylinux.org` This is because one “dev” contains all different DCs inside DEV env. ---
**Author:** ![darkbat91](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/darkbat91/32/39_2.png) [@darkbat91](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/darkbat91)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 11:14am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/30 "2020-12-10T11:14:04Z")
@RNM - Good catch Added planet i prefer rss but that is the current standard name so lets stick with it. @schlitzered - Split makes sense for the Free IPA Environment I think that splitting it on dev first would be a mistake as i doubt we are going to have a complete separate development supporting environment if that makes sense. So the logical split would be at the `dcc` level which provides the physical location of the system. I would be interested in @label Thoughts. ---
**Author:** ![morsik](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/morsik/32/54_2.png) [@morsik](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/morsik)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 11:24am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/31 "2020-12-10T11:24:57Z")
Even if you don’t have complete separate dev env, it’s still more logical to put multiple DCs into env, than putting multiple envs envs into single dc 😉 Because first you have infrastructure (dev/prod for eg), and under that dev/prod you have different hosts (and those hosts belongs to some DCs). Putting everything other way makes multiple prods and multiple devs environments from logical point of view, but I don’t think we want to have them to be multiple times, we want to have one prod and one dev. And also, putting dev under DC makes more mess, becuase now you can have: `dev.pl1` (because someone could give free servers for dev in Poland) and `prod.us2`. So now you don’t have prod in `pl1`, and you don’t have `dev` in `us2` 😛 ---
**Author:** ![label](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c5a1d2/32.png) [@label](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/label)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 11:54am UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/32 "2020-12-10T11:54:17Z")
The IPA servers will live at the [rockylinux.org](http://rockylinux.org) domain, internally, to keep everything consistent. There will be a chance of hosts sitting at the root domain, but not many. We can add additional internal zones without an issue, also. Doing split DNS makes sense when using FreeIPA as @darkbat91 has stated. FreeIPA has location support (and thus helps with DNS priorities for SRV and NS records). Because of this, it needs to be determined how the host’s subdomains should be laid out. While I’m a fan of location before environment in names, it really does not matter. They both have their pro’s and con’s, with those things simply being a matter of preference for the organization. Unfortunately, I’m split on which one would be the right choice. On one hand, splitting based on DCC makes my life easier in FreeIPA when configuring the location system. On the other hand, splitting based on environment logically pinpoints what that host serves. The other thing is too if you split on environment, we can reduce the number of subdomains we’d end up having. ``` us-west-ci-1.dev.rockylinux.org # Subdomain is dev.rockylinux.org vs... ci-1.us-west.dev.rockylinux.org # Subdomain is us-west.dev.rockylinux.org ``` The second one at least eliminates one subdomain. When I look at this… ``` dev-ci-1.us-west.rockylinux.org # Subdomain is us-west.rockylinux.org vs... ci-1.dev.us-west.rockylinux.org # Subdomain is dev.us-west.rockylinux.org ``` Honestly, both of those look really ugly to me, despite the first one bringing us down one subdomain. Like I said, I don’t really have a preference. But, what I would suggest is if at possible, let’s try to keep the subdomains down to a minimum, by using the first lines in both examples above. ---
**Author:** ![greg.hellings](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4da419/32.png) [@greg.hellings](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/greg.hellings)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 5:00pm UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/33 "2020-12-10T17:00:14Z")
> [@label](#): > > l live at the [rockylinux.org](http://rockylinux.org) domain, internally, to keep everything consistent. There will be a chance of hosts sitting at the root domain, but not many. We can add additional internal zones without an issue, als I like the top solutions the best. I feel that the environment is more important and should be at the domain level. Having the name of the host be dcc-function-arity makes the most sense. There doesn’t seem to be a need to consistently split out subdomain into function, and it looks really nice to anyone on the command line to be able to quickly look and see, “Oh, this is us-west-ci-1 host and not de-ci-1”. ---
**Author:** ![schlitzered](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/schlitzered/32/48_2.png) [@schlitzered](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/schlitzered)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 8:09pm UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/34 "2020-12-10T20:09:38Z")
there is no need for the ipa hosts to sit at the root domain, except if you want to expose them to the public internet. which is something i would not recommend. @morsik: regarding dcc first env. to me this makes no sense, other way around is more natural. this is also what big could companies like AWS and Azure do. if you think of subdomains as boxes, the boxes should get bigger from left to the right part. or how would you explain that the hostname portion is bigger then the TLD? also having the region first in the hostname portion of the fdqn somehow defeats the purpose of DNS search lists. @darkbat91 why do you want to save on subdomains, as explained above. they can help with service discovery. in the example you posted above, you are simply trading a “-” for an “.” but the dot gives you real subdomains, which allow you to have different DNS srv records, and also allow you to physically split the zone to another DNS server (if one want to). so even if you do many subdomains. all could live within the same zone: so you could either have: host-1.dev.us-east-1 in zone [example.com](http://example.com) or host-1 in zone [dev.us-east-1.example.com](http://dev.us-east-1.example.com) but there is no way you could do a DNS zone split, or region/stge specific DNS discovery records with the scheme you suggested above. so from my experience it is way more flexible and gives you more options if you do it like this: `ci-1.dev.us1.rockylinuxorg` ---
**Author:** ![label](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c5a1d2/32.png) [@label](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/label)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 8:29pm UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/35 "2020-12-10T20:29:02Z")
@schlitzered They will be at the root domain for consistency. They will _not_ be exposed to the internet. Nowhere does them being at the root domain, handling an internal domain, does it imply they will be exposed to the internet in any fashion. My IPA servers sit at the root of my internal domain [angelsofclockwork.net](http://angelsofclockwork.net), but you don’t see them nor can you talk to them on the external internet. ---
**Author:** ![schlitzered](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/schlitzered/32/48_2.png) [@schlitzered](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/schlitzered)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 8:32pm UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/36 "2020-12-10T20:32:33Z")
@label: but why having them there at all, and deal with dns views, when they can happily live on a subdomain, that is only hosted on an internal dns? ---
**Author:** ![label](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c5a1d2/32.png) [@label](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/label)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 8:34pm UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/37 "2020-12-10T20:34:31Z")
FreeIPA should always own the primary internal domain, and thus, be at the primary, root internal domain. This is clearly laid out in the Red Hat documentation and deployment recommendations of the freeipa website. ---
**Author:** ![schlitzered](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/schlitzered/32/48_2.png) [@schlitzered](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/schlitzered)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 8:45pm UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/38 "2020-12-10T20:45:30Z")
i am sorry, but this is not true or is it needed in any way we run a IdM cluster which stretches over different continents. none of our IdM servers is directly running on at the top of the REALM domain. each idm server is hosted on a subdomain, that is specific to its region. hostnames are like this, adjusted for REALM [EXAMPLE.COM](http://EXAMPLE.COM): us region 1: “[idm-1.prod.us1.example.com](http://idm-1.prod.us1.example.com)” “[idm-2.prod.us1.example.com](http://idm-2.prod.us1.example.com)” “[idm-3.prod.us1.example.com](http://idm-3.prod.us1.example.com)” us region 2: “[idm-1.prod.us2.example.com](http://idm-1.prod.us2.example.com)” “[idm-2.prod.us2.example.com](http://idm-2.prod.us2.example.com)” “[idm-3.prod.us2.example.com](http://idm-3.prod.us2.example.com)” eu region 1: “[idm-1.prod.eu1.example.com](http://idm-1.prod.eu1.example.com)” “[idm-2.prod.eu1.example.com](http://idm-2.prod.eu1.example.com)” “[idm-3.prod.eu1.example.com](http://idm-3.prod.eu1.example.com)” eu region 2: “[idm-1.prod.eu2.example.com](http://idm-1.prod.eu2.example.com)” “[idm-2.prod.eu2.example.com](http://idm-2.prod.eu2.example.com)” “[idm-3.prod.eu2.example.com](http://idm-3.prod.eu2.example.com)” this scheme allows us to send IdM clients from each reagion to there the IdM servers in the same region, or to the IdM server in the region with the lowest latency. the only requirement for an IdM server is, that is has to be a FQDN that is within the same realm. means: [idm-1.prod.us1.blarg.com](http://idm-1.prod.us1.blarg.com) can never serve the realm [EXAMPLE.COM](http://EXAMPLE.COM). this is the only restriction when it comes to the IdM FQDN. on the other hand, and IdM client, that has an FQDN outside the REALM domain name, can join a different REALM. meaning [client.blarg.com](http://client.blarg.com) can join [EXAMPLE.COM](http://EXAMPLE.COM) ---
**Author:** ![morsik](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/morsik/32/54_2.png) [@morsik](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/morsik)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 10:14pm UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/39 "2020-12-10T22:14:46Z")
> [@schlitzered](#): > > to me this makes no sense, other way around is more natural. this is also what big could companies like AWS and Azure do. > > if you think of subdomains as boxes, the boxes should get bigger from left to the right part. to me that’s why exactly ENV then DC makes sense in the tree 🙂 (I mean `host00.dc1.prod.domain.tld`) Beucase you have big box that contains all dev/prod stuff, and they contain multiple different DCs inside. You explained by yourself why it makes sense 😛 You don’t want to have multiple boxes with different envs, you want to have single one. And regarding “companies like AWS and Azure” - they are splitting everything per DC because it’s actual physical and logical split - in case of this project I don’t think this is necessary - I think we would rather use everything as single thing all over the world ---
**Author:** ![schlitzered](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forums.rockylinux.org/schlitzered/32/48_2.png) [@schlitzered](https://forums.rockylinux.org/u/schlitzered)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2020, 10:27pm UTC](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73/40 "2020-12-10T22:27:24Z")
> [@morsik](#): > > Beucase you have big box that contains all dev/prod stuff, and they contain multiple different DCs inside. You explained by yourself why it makes sense 😛 You don’t want to have multiple boxes with different envs, you want to have single one. > > And regarding “companies like AWS and Azure” - they are splitting everything per DC because it’s actual physical and logical split - in case of this project I don’t think this is necessary - I think we would rather use everything as single thing all over the world no this is actually not what i said or at least meant. but well we are running in circles here. it seems like no one is around who could mediate or would be in charge of making decisions. anyhow, it seems like without knowing how the hosting infrastructure would look like it also makes not much sense to talk about stuff like DNS (or anything else). feels like putting the cart before the horse. \o/ [Previous page](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73.md?page=1) [Next page](https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/naming-scheme-rev-1/73.md?page=3)