Project

General

Profile

Actions
Copy link

User story #7571

closed

Change hostname source to prefer FQDN over RUDDER_HOSTNAME

Added by Benoît PECCATTE about 9 years ago. Updated over 8 years ago.

Status:
Rejected
Priority:
N/A
Assignee:
François ARMAND
Category:
Web - Nodes & inventories
Target version:
4.0.0~rc2
Pull Request:
https://github.com/Normation/ldap-inv...
UX impact:
Suggestion strength:
User visibility:
Effort required:
Name check:
Fix check:
Regression:

Description

In 3.1 #7570 RUDDER_HOSTNAME is preferred over FQDN.
We should prefer FQDN, but since this can change the hostname used by rudder on a given node, we should do it in a major release.
This issue makes it a default value in 3.

Subtasks 1 (0 open — 1 closed)

User story #7578: Fix tests since we change order of hostnameRejectedFrançois ARMAND2015-12-08Actions

Related issues 2 (0 open — 2 closed)

Related to Rudder - Bug #7568: Inventory <FQDN> content differs from hostname --fqdn and may lead to unauthorised nodes (impl for system techniques)RejectedActions
Related to Rudder - User story #8022: Allow users to specify node hostname (FQDN)ReleasedAlexis MoussetActions
Actions
Copy link
 #1

Updated by Benoît PECCATTE about 9 years ago

  • Tracker changed from Bug to User story
Actions
Copy link
 #2

Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 9 years ago

  • Status changed from New to In progress
  • Assignee set to Vincent MEMBRÉ
Actions
Copy link
 #3

Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 9 years ago

  • Status changed from In progress to Pending technical review
  • Assignee changed from Vincent MEMBRÉ to François ARMAND
  • Pull Request set to https://github.com/Normation/ldap-inventory/pull/75
Actions
Copy link
 #4

Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 9 years ago

  • Status changed from Pending technical review to Pending release
  • % Done changed from 0 to 100
Actions
Copy link
 #6

Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 9 years ago

  • Status changed from Pending release to Discussion
Actions
Copy link
 #8

Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 9 years ago

  • Parent task deleted (#7568)
Actions
Copy link
 #9

Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ about 9 years ago

  • Related to Bug #7568: Inventory <FQDN> content differs from hostname --fqdn and may lead to unauthorised nodes (impl for system techniques) added
Actions
Copy link
 #10

Updated by Benoît PECCATTE about 9 years ago

  • Target version changed from 3.2.0~rc1 to 3.2.0~rc2
Actions
Copy link
 #11

Updated by Benoît PECCATTE almost 9 years ago

  • Target version changed from 3.2.0~rc2 to 3.2.0
Actions
Copy link
 #12

Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ almost 9 years ago

  • Target version changed from 3.2.0 to 3.2.1
Actions
Copy link
 #13

Updated by Vincent MEMBRÉ almost 9 years ago

  • Target version changed from 3.2.1 to 3.2.2
Actions
Copy link
 #14

Updated by Janos Mattyasovszky almost 9 years ago

I would also suggest to enable a "hook"-binary, that if it exists, it is executed to resolve the FQDN of the node being run on, since determining how the node is called from "outside" is not always that easy, as it depends on many things:
- Do we use the same DNS Server as the policy server?
- Do we use the same IP to reach the policy server as the default gateway's IP's FQDN? (issue present on multi-homed servers)
- Does the external DNS also know me by the name I think I have? (SUSE's openstack assigns some bogus hostnames like external.server.fqdn)

Or it should be customizable at least via a local variable, but the binary-approach would actually allow you to use a custom logic to reilable resolve how the node is called, even if it is renamed.

Actions
Copy link
 #15

Updated by Janos Mattyasovszky almost 9 years ago

Sorry, misread the topic, opened a separate ticket for that at #8022

Actions
Copy link
 #16

Updated by Alexis Mousset almost 9 years ago

  • Target version changed from 3.2.2 to 4.0.0~rc2
Actions
Copy link
 #17

Updated by François ARMAND over 8 years ago

  • Related to User story #8022: Allow users to specify node hostname (FQDN) added
Actions
Copy link
 #18

Updated by François ARMAND over 8 years ago

  • Status changed from Discussion to Rejected

Given all the comments and work done in #8022, this one is no more relevant.

I'm closing it, see what is proposed in #8022.

Actions
Copy link

Also available in: Atom PDF