Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Networking

Suitable Naming Conventions For Workstations? 688

spectre_240sx writes "We've discussed server naming a fair amount in the past, but I haven't seen much about workstations. Where I currently work, we embed a lot of information in our workstation names: site, warranty end date, machine type, etc. I'm of the opinion that this is too much information to overload in the machine name when it can more suitably be stored in the computer description. I'd love to hear how others are naming their workstations and some pros and cons for different naming schemes. Should computers be logically tied to the person that they're currently assigned to, or does that just cause unnecessary work when a machine changes hands? Do the management tools in use make a difference in how workstations are named?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Suitable Naming Conventions For Workstations?

Comments Filter:
  • Location? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 17, 2009 @10:16PM (#29100207)

    I name them by location eg. Building-Room-{Front, Back, Left, Right...} makes tracking them down a bit easier provided no one moved it...

  • Depends, really... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Monday August 17, 2009 @10:20PM (#29100245) Journal
    I'm not a fan of crazy overloading(the name has to be unique in any case and I'd rather do a lookup if I really need the warranty details, rather than stare a nasty truncated version of them in the face every day); but what works best really depends on how computers are used in your organization.

    For instance, if you have laptops, individually assigned to employees, and relatively low turnover, a name that tells you about the machine's primary user is really handy. It allows you to instantly associate the voice on the other end of the phone, or the name on the trouble ticket, with the machine in question.

    If you have desktops, location based naming might be more useful, particularly if users move around, are replaced frequently, or share hardware per shift or something.

    It's hard to give general rules for naming because, in essence, a name should capture(as succinctly as possible) the salient characteristics that make something unique. Exactly what those characteristics are depends heavily on how your organization is set up.
  • service tag (Score:5, Interesting)

    by smash ( 1351 ) on Monday August 17, 2009 @10:24PM (#29100279) Homepage Journal
    There is very little you can store in a workstation name that will be static and useful once you go beyond about 10 machines (maybe even less than that).

    People move, machines get re-allocated, rebuilt, etc.

    I use the service tag. Why? Several reasons:

    • its already printed on the machine
    • you can get it out of the bios when imaging the PC
    • its one less thing to ask the user for if you need to do a warranty claim
    • it will never change
    • if will be unique, presuming you are a single supplier organisation

    Stuff like "bob-pc" or "accounts1" does not scale and either becomes inconsistent, or you need to keep renaming PCs which presents other issues (fucks up any configuration databases you have, etc).

    So, service tag - boring as fuck, but does the job.

  • by wandazulu ( 265281 ) on Monday August 17, 2009 @10:26PM (#29100307)

    ...but I'm a big fan of giving machines actual names, after TV shows, bands, movies, fiction, etc. I prefer to log into "Trixie.mycompany.com" instead of "LAUX001"; the former, in addition to being easier to remember, just gives the machine a trifle bit of "personality". Yes, I realize that the latter may convey more information (mail servers especially seem to do this: "CHIMAIL01", "NYCEXCH05", etc.), but it feels cold and impersonal; if you treat your machines as just machines, as just any old random tool you'd grab and work with, then they become just a series of interchangeable parts. Giving a machine a name invokes something, typically whimsical, that just adds a touch of humanity back into the system. Yes it's still a machine, yes it's going to spit out a thousand nonsensical errors when you forget a semicolon somewhere in your C++ file, and yes it will eventually be replaced, but for that period of time when you're working with it, you're just that little bit more connected to something more ... personal.

    Maybe this is just old school thinking; it seems like this was much more common back when everyone had an account on the campus Unix boxen, complete with subtle importance ("Oh, you have an account on Kramden? That's a much faster Vax than Norton...what project are you working on that you scored that??").

  • KISS (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Frippet ( 825472 ) on Monday August 17, 2009 @10:39PM (#29100429)
    Keep it simple. I work at a college, and what we do for desktops is, we name them after location, room, number of workstation. So if the workstation is at our aviation campus in room Y109 and it's the 3rd workstation, it would be AVY10903 (AV-Aviation, Y109-Room, 03-3rd workstation) Laptops, we tie to users, we give it the users login name as the laptops name. We find this easy so when we have staff/faculty turn over, we are not running to workstations to rename them, and if its a laptop user that is being replaced, the laptop is returned to IT and we get it ready for the next user. This may or may not work for you, but it works for me.
  • Re:service tag (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jcrousedotcom ( 999175 ) on Monday August 17, 2009 @11:00PM (#29100617) Homepage
    That's basically what we're doing - except we're dividing them by program (we're a government agency) which makes it a little easier for us to delegate AD administration to each group of local IT folks - we have 5 programs so ISP (Information Serices Program) is ISP-servicetag....

    We're putting each program (of computers) in its own OU and granting AD rights to a group to manage the PC's in each OU (so they can reset, delete or modify the computer objects). We have 5000 desktops across the country and not everyone needs to have rights to everyone elses' AD computer object(s)....
  • by mark-t ( 151149 ) <markt@nerdf[ ].com ['lat' in gap]> on Tuesday August 18, 2009 @12:40AM (#29101375) Journal
    I see nothing wrong with naming a computer by function. If the function is being reassigned, the OS itself is probably being reinstalled as well, so you still have to manually name the machine again anyways... so nothing is lost by giving it a new name at that time.
  • by Rei ( 128717 ) on Tuesday August 18, 2009 @12:53AM (#29101451) Homepage

    Agreed. Just come up with a naming scheme and stick with it. Otherwise, you're just going to waste time trying to keep the names matching the machines' current status.

    At the university I work, the servers are named after famous figures in the fields of psychology and brain research. At home, they're named after things from Star Control II (Ultron = the desktop that always breaks; Chmmr = the powerful computation server; Spathi = the laptop (which can flee the network); Greenish = the printer; Quasispace = the wifi network; etc).

  • by Darinbob ( 1142669 ) on Tuesday August 18, 2009 @02:18AM (#29102071)
    A name needs to be recognizable by humans. Because inevitably someone is going to want to share some files and it's a whole lot easier if you can type in a normal name instead of mistaking RS34598 with RS34589. Granted, the user's name isn't good, because machines change hands all the time (without telling the busy bodies at IT about it). Cube numbers don't work, since a lot of machines are lab machines, or may turn into lab machines.

    There really isn't a good way. Would be nice to have two names, a permanent one, assigned early on, probably related to an asset ID, and a nickname based on the user or purpose of the machine. The nickname can be changed anytime the user or department wants to do so. Except that this may be a pain to do on some operating systems.
  • by xaxa ( 988988 ) on Tuesday August 18, 2009 @05:47AM (#29103111)

    (for lab computers)
    Pick something computing/science/maths-sounding. Name all computers of the same type with that, plus a number: vertex01, vertex02, ... vertex60. pixel01, synapse01, glyph01.
    It's not as boring as "asset1241", but it's a *lot* easier to find numbered PCs in the lab. It's also easier for anyone wanting to use a machine remotely. Finding your usual glyph12 is running slow? Well, you know at least 11 other machine names.

    Staff/research students could name their own PCs, presumably because it's a lot easier to find one PC out of just three in an office.

    Servers were named after birds, supercomputers after (IIRC) greek gods, and the authentication servers after nuclear accidents ("there's a problem with three-mile-island, so I've changed the DNS to point to tokaimura")

  • by Sandbags ( 964742 ) on Tuesday August 18, 2009 @07:53AM (#29103793) Journal

    We move PCs around constantly, so naming then mased on physical location is dumb for us. Same goes for typing them to a person, as we have a lot of contractors as well.

    We name PCs based on building and major department ownership, followed by a hex string. Names are never re-used. The current IP of the system gives us a real good idea of where it's located (in terms of room or area), but it's specific physical address (desk location, etc) is stored in an asset tracking dtabase, nice and simple. Knowing where a machine actually sits however is usually not as impoirant as knowking where the USER sits. Rarely is anyone from workstation support ever dispatched to a machine unless the person using it has called, so tracking by person OR by location is redundant. It's only important to know what business unit owns the machine for when it recycled back into the mix for redeployment if it's taken off a desk and re-imaged or requires major hardware sugery so we know what business unit to give it back to later.

    Servers are named by building, security enclave, OS type, application, and an ID. By looking at a name we not only know who owns it, and who supports it (from an infrastructure, OS, and application perspective) but we also know what it's role is. We can identify it's deployed location (server room and sometimes even rack row) by it's IP. If we can't get an exact deployment location from it's IP, the asset database has that info. (and it's hardware type, SN, deployed date, waranty status, and complete history of maintenance and software deployments too).

  • One Step Further... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MarcQuadra ( 129430 ) on Tuesday August 18, 2009 @10:37AM (#29105555)

    For the sake of making things easier on our SMS admins and the field team, we use the Dell/Apple/HP serial or service tag as well, since the manufacturer can keep the specs and the purchase order info themselves.

    We do this:

    Brand Code is either D for Dell, A for Apple, H for HP, etc.

    And VMs under them are:

    VM

    So right now, my box is CISD6XQDMJ5, but I'm writing on a VM called CISD6XQDMJ5VM04.

    The beauty of this is that it lets the admins on SMS easily select departments by building queries that say:

    for all machines that begin with "CIS", do this thing.

    or

    For all machines that the fourth character is "H", do this other thing.

    and

    for all machines ending in "VM??", do -NOT- do this thing, since it might be hardware-specific.

    As for location and/or username, that stuff changes too rapidly to adhere to, if I know what -department- the box is in, I'll probably be able to find it, and the serial number leads back tot he model on the web site, so I can go to Psychology looking for an OptiPlex 270 that's acting-up.

To program is to be.

Working...