<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<tt>Michael Brown wrote:</tt>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:201003201855.24907.mbrown@fensystems.co.uk">
<title>[gPXE] sanbootconf hostname setting</title>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<p><tt><font size="2">This appears to be sufficient for renaming a
computer that is *not* a domain<br>
member. I am not sure how this would interact with computers that *are*<br>
domain members, and I don't have time to test it right now, so any input<br>
would be welcome.</font></tt></p>
</blockquote>
<tt><br>
I'm a little wary of this patch... It prepends "star-" to the hostname
first off (perhaps something to do with StarWind), and also doesn't
check for an empty hostname, as far as I can tell. These could be
addressed with a modified version of the patch.<br>
<br>
I would not advise anyone to change the computer name is this fashion
for a domain member. All of the name-change functions which are used
when one changes computername for a computer already-joined would be
skipped. If the empty-hostname-check is implemented, current domain
members in the world who upgrade their sanbootconf but do not hand out
a DHCP hostname option should stay the same.<br>
<br>
Seems like it could be useful for the non-domain-member scenario, but I
still say the right way to choose your hostname is to use Windows to
set it; just too many unknowns for me. I have a bit of a hard time
understanding why you'd really want to use this, though... If you're
booting computer A from SAN X, it's a one-to-one relationship. If
you're booting computer B from SAN X and want computer B's name to be
different, you could not use SAN X for both computers A and B
simultaneously, so why change the hostname? If you've got
copy-on-write or some other delta system and computers A and B connect
to SANs X and Y (derived from Z) respectively, why not have a one-time
computer rename using the Windows interface? The only answer I can
perceive would be "stateless clients at each boot". That's where this
could be useful, in my opinion...<br>
<br>
Who knows what software makes a note of the computer-name for licensing
(or other) reasons, though. Without using Windows (or Mini-Setup) to
change the name, there aren't any MS-supported guarantees, as far as I
know. Maybe supportability is not a concern.<br>
<br>
I assume that these registry entries were determined by the developer
to be those that Mini-Setup or the computer-name-change function seems
to modify. I believe some other commercial products do something
similar. I've used offline registry editing of the same entries myself
to accomplish the same thing, and haven't yet encountered a major issue.<br>
<br>
Either way, implementing an empty hostname check is likely best, so
only those who wish to attempt it are affected by this change.<br>
<br>
- Shao Miller<br>
</tt>
</body>
</html>