Skip to main content

Checking if my hostname is correct (ovh vps + centos7)



I recently purchased a VPS from OVH with Centos 7 preinstalled. I want to make sure my hostname is correctly set.



According to some tutorials:




hostname returns the hostname
hostname -f returns the FQDN



After executing these commands, I got the same result: vpsxxxxxxxx.ovh.net
I thought hostname and FQDN are different!



cat /etc/hosts



127.0.0.1 - localhost
IP - vpsxxxxxxxx.ovh.net - vpsxxxxxxxx



I am confused, I have linked a domain name that I have purchased separately to my VPS, I am also planning to add another domain name to run two sites in my VPS.




Is my hostname correct?
How can we call vpsxxxxxxxx.ovh.net? An external domain name, an internal domain, a hostname, a subdomain of ovh.net?
What about the two domains names that I have linked to the VPS? Do they need some configurations in /etc/hosts?



I have to fix these issues to enable postfix mail server.


Answer



The hostname should always be set to the FQDN in CentOS 7, according to Red Hat's recommendations.




A host name can be a free-form string up to 64 characters in length. However, Red Hat recommends that both static and transient names match the fully-qualified domain name (FQDN) used for the machine in DNS, such as host.example.com. It is also recommended that the static and transient names consists only of 7 bit ASCII lower-case characters, no spaces or dots, and limits itself to the format allowed for DNS domain name labels, even though this is not a strict requirement. Older specifications do not permit the underscore, and so their use is not recommended.





If you're running email on the server, then the hostname should be set to one in a domain that you control, rather than one controlled by your service provider. You do not need to place it in /etc/hosts, provided that the appropriate DNS entries exist for the name.


Comments

Post a Comment

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?
Post a Comment
Read more

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,
Post a Comment
Read more

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
Post a Comment
Read more