Comment 5 for bug 1287224

Dave Walker (davewalker) wrote :

Whilst this seems like a reasonably good idea for small deployments and demo, it doesn't really add value to the larger picture of hyperscale IMO. It steers towards treating the machines as pets, rather than cattle.

It's harder to kill a node named cutekitten, than sa47ghs. Try it. :) .. nodes should be easily expendable.

With the primary interface for deployed nodes being juju it distracts away from the juju model of "$ juju ssh 3", where juju should be abstracting away the hostname. This encourages direct access.

There doesn't necessarily need to be a 1:1 mapping between machine name to hostname. If there is value in having friendly names for a node, this could be via alias or CNAME - with a functional representation.. such as dbserver1.example.org. This can also be moved between nodes, if the workload migrates.

What would have my interest is physical placement node names.. such as CountryCampusOfficeRackShelf (ie uklnbluefin1a).. THEN things get interesting.. but solving that, means you've solved the MAAS<-->physical identification conundrum. :)

What happens when the initial pool is exhausted? Should decommissioned friendly hostnames be recycled? Excluding the 7 vulgar words already discussed, would you be willing to accept responsibility for insuring that other inappropriate words are not used? Note, that formal genitilia names, God+Jesus+Mohamed+Buddha etc (which I could see people finding offensive being attached to a hostname) and other inappropriate words such as 'nigger' are present in the system dictionary. Filtering 70K words seems pretty risky to me.

No cloud that I am aware of currently provisions dictionary words to cloud instances, and this isn't for lazy reasons IMO.