BIG-IP Configuration Object Naming Conventions
George posted an excellent blog on hostname nomenclature a while back, but something we haven’t discussed much in this space is a naming convention for the BIG-IP configuration objects. Last week, DevCentral community user Deon posted a question on exactly that. Sometimes there are standards just for the sake of having one, but in most cases, and particularly in this case, having standards is a very good thing. Señor Forum, hoolio, and MVP hamish weighed in with some good advice.
[app name]_[protocol]_[object type]
As hoolio pointed out in the forum, each object now has a description field, so the metadata capability is there to establish identifying information (knowledge base IDs, troubleshooting info, application owners), but having an object name that is quickly searchable and identifiable to operational staff is key. Hamish had a slight alternative format for virtuals:
For network virtuals, I’ve always made the network part of the name, as hamish also recommends in his guidance:
network VS's tend to be named net-net.num.dot.ed-masklen. e.g. net-0.0.0.0-0 is the default address. Where they conflict (e.g. two defaults depending on src clan, it gets an extra descriptor between net- and the ip address. e.g. net-wireless-0.0.0.0-0 (Default network VS for a wireless VLAN). I don't currently have any network VS's for specific ports. But they'd be something like net-0.0.0.0-0-port
What standards do you use? Share in the comments section below, or post to the forum thread.