Makes a whole lot of sense for me too. Once you create your OU's and place everything where they need to go then it gets even easier, for me anyways. So if I need to see all systems in a particular region or location I navigate to that function or location specific OU and go from there. Keep it simple, seriously! If you're dumping everything into one OU then I can see how it'd be a problem.
On 1/31/08, Michael Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I choose a 2 letter prefix for the location such as CH for Chicago, then a > meaningful name after that like Exchange for the type of server, then a > number for the amount of servers you will have > CHExchange1 CHFile1, etc. > makes so much more sense to me. i know where it is, and what it is. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 10:44 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: Server naming > > At my last job, we used golf related terms. Eagle, Putter, Driver, Wedge, > Bunker, etc... at the job before that, we used superheroes. > Superman, Spiderman, etc. > > Currently, we're using role based names, which I actually don't like, as > it > makes it that much easier for a hacker to know where to go for the info > he's > looking for... > > Joe Heaton > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 8:21 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Server naming > > On Jan 31, 2008 10:22 AM, David Lum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Attacking server naming conventions again, how do you guys name your > > servers? > > Depends on the nature of the organization. For larger organizations, or > if you have lots of servers, a name based on the site, function and a > number > tend to be the only way to go, especially with the flat naming system > Windows still uses internally. > > For smaller shops with the right attitude (like my current employer), I > tend to go with more interesting names, with a theme. > Small shops almost always have all their servers being multi-purpose. > Naming everything "SRV1", "SRV2", and so on tends to be confusing. > For example, at my current main gig, we've got TIGER, PUMA, LION, COUGAR, > and NTSERVER. (Can you guess which one has the legacy app that just don't > die? ;-) ) At my last main gig, we used Simpsons characters. This > doesn't > scale up to large orgs, though, and if the place has a stuffy attitude > it's > not appropriate, either. For the latter, I usually just use "ORGSVR1" or > whatever. > > RFC-1178 has some advice on this, although it's oriented more towards DNS, > where the tree structure makes naming conflicts less of an issue. > > > Currently we use location and function in the name, but what about a > > server that does more than one thing? > > Use a more generic name, like "SRV" or "UTIL" or whatever. Indeed, if > it's at all likely a server will be tasked with multiple things, I always > try to go with the more generic name. A server named one thing that's > really doing more is misleading. Worse is when the original task then > gets > moved off, and now you have a server named "DC1" that isn't a DC anymore, > or > something like that. > > -- Ben > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ > > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~ > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
