Well, it helps to remember that RFC 1178 is from the days of single monolithic mainframes. Today we've got virtual machines that do everything, so each server

Well, it helps to remember that RFC 1178 is from the days of single monolithic mainframes. Today we've got virtual machines that do everything, so each server can legitimately carry one name. However, if you do call it "prod-app-web-7," then you need to make sure that it's a web server for the app application in production and if that changes, you need to spin up a new server instead of reusing the VM. But, hey we don't name infrastructure sites "Site 1" and "Site 2". They're "Milwaukee" and "Austin" and "DR". So if we do that, why name them "EMC-SAN-1" and "EMC-SAN-2"? We're going to retire that name eventually and there won't be a SAN 1 anymore. And what happens after "EMC-SAN-9"? So, instead why not "EMC-SAN-ARTEMIS" and "EMC-SAN-APOLLO" and "EMC-SAN-HADES"? There's a distinction between physical names and logical names, too. What kind of long term nomenclature planning should we have? Look at hurricane names. The NWS does that so people remember which is which.