Comment 8 for bug 1434376
Revision history for this message
| Lucas Alvares Gomes (lucasagomes) wrote | #8 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
a60fb26
(Get the code!)
Right, I do think we should relax the name I don't see reason why they should be forced to be restricted as a hostname if they are not going to be set as the hostname for the instance on that node. If someone wants to treat the nodes name as hostnames, fair enuff, with free form name field you can do that too.
I could even suggest to us to allow operators to give a regex in the config file where names could be matched against if they want to really restrict it.
But I find it odd that by default you can't create a node called "node_1" because "_" is not supported. Or, names like 'A' * 64 will failed because after the 63 character it's expected to have a '.' (period) and then you can have more 63 charactrers and another period and so on...