On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 10:30:07AM +0800, Mark Tinka wrote: > On Saturday 21 March 2009 06:38:55 pm br...@yoafrica.com > wrote: > > > Slighty related... > > > > Can people please post their recommended reverse dns > > naming conventions for a small ISP with growth and > > scalability in mind. I already have one drawn up, but I > > would like to contrast and compare :D > > As regards core infrastructure, I posted the below on this > list a while back, not sure if it'll help. > > http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg01341.html >
Similarly, I did a presentation on this a while ago. This may be of some use. http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog31/abstracts.php?pt=NjExJm5hbm9nMzE=&nm=nanog31 (also: http://tinyurl.com/cuqv5e ) The details of the presentation are more geared to a multi-campus enterprise network (i.e. a university), but the two larger lessons that came out of moving the university over to a more standard naming scheme were: Derivability: Being able to synthesize the name with a few pieces of data makes naming and debugging easier. Longer is okay: Barring software limitations on name length, a longer name is not a problem if a person knows that they're going to get it right on the first try. We used CNAMEs if we wanted abbreviations. YMMV ....Matt
