Skip to main content

linux - Setting the hostname: FQDN or short name?



I've noticed that the "preferred" method of setting the system hostname is fundamentally different between Red Hat/CentOS and Debian/Ubuntu systems.




CentOS documentation and the RHEL deployment guide say the hostname should be the FQDN:




HOSTNAME=, where should be the Fully Qualified Domain
Name (FQDN), such as hostname.example.com, but can be whatever
hostname is necessary.




The RHEL install guide is slightly more ambiguous:





Setup prompts you to supply a host name for this computer, either as a
fully-qualified domain name (FQDN) in the format hostname.domainname
or as a short host name in the format hostname.




The Debian reference says the hostname should not use the FQDN:





3.5.5. The hostname



The kernel maintains the system hostname. The init script in runlevel
S which is symlinked to "/etc/init.d/hostname.sh" sets the system
hostname at boot time (using the hostname command) to the name stored
in "/etc/hostname". This file should contain only the system hostname,
not a fully qualified domain name.




I haven't seen any specific recommendations from IBM about which to use, but some software seems to have a preference.




My questions:




  • In a heterogeneous environment, is it better to use the vendor recommendation, or choose one and be consistent across all hosts?

  • What software have you encountered which is sensitive to whether the hostname is set to the FQDN or short name?


Answer



I would choose a consistent approach across the entire environment. Both solutions work fine and will remain compatible with most applications. There is a difference in manageability, though.




I go with the short name as the HOSTNAME setting, and set the FQDN as the first column in /etc/hosts for the server's IP, followed by the short name.



I have not encountered many software packages that enforce or display a preference between the two. I find the short name to be cleaner for some applications, specifically logging. Maybe I've been unlucky in seeing internal domains like server.northside.chicago.rizzomanufacturing.com. Who wants to see that in the logs or a shell prompt?



Sometimes, I'm involved in company acquisitions or restructuring where internal domains and/or subdomains change. I like using the short hostname in these cases because logging, kickstarts, printing, systems monitoring, etc. do not need full reconfiguration to account for the new domain names.



A typical RHEL/CentOS server setup for a server named "rizzo" with internal domain "ifp.com", would look like:



/etc/sysconfig/network:
HOSTNAME=rizzo

...


-



/etc/hosts:
127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.localdomain localhost4 localhost4.localdomain4
::1 localhost localhost.localdomain localhost6 localhost6.localdomain6

172.16.100.13 rizzo.ifp.com rizzo



-



[root@rizzo ~]# hostname 
rizzo


-




/var/log/messages snippet:
Dec 15 10:10:13 rizzo proftpd[19675]: 172.16.100.13 (::ffff:206.15.236.182[::ffff:206.15.236.182]) - Preparing to
chroot to directory '/app/upload/GREEK'
Dec 15 10:10:51 rizzo proftpd[20660]: 172.16.100.13 (::ffff:12.28.170.2[::ffff:12.28.170.2]) - FTP session opened.
Dec 15 10:10:51 rizzo proftpd[20660]: 172.16.100.13 (::ffff:12.28.170.2[::ffff:12.28.170.2]) - Preparing to chroot
to directory '/app/upload/ftp/SRRID'

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able