[openstack-dev] [nova] [neutron] Should we continue providing FQDNs for instance hostnames?

Jeremy Stanley fungi at yuggoth.org
Wed Sep 6 15:06:47 UTC 2017

On 2017-09-06 10:40:14 +0100 (+0100), Stephen Finucane wrote:
> OK, and we do want to use a FQDN as the hostnames inside the
> guest? That's my key question. Random ServerFault questions seems
> to suggest no clear answer to this [1].

As a data point, the servers maintained by the Infra team are
consistently built with their FQDN as the instance name itself, and
then the hostname and domainname set from that value in order to
avoid the dreaded "foo.novalocal" sorts of FQDNs prevalent in so
many OpenStack environments. At least for us, having OpenStack
specify the domain is more of a nuisance to be worked around than

You may also want to consider asking a similar question on the
operators ML, or perhaps sending them a pointer to this discussion
so you can get more real-world feedback.
Jeremy Stanley
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 949 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170906/088ce019/attachment.sig>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list