Since I'm starting to deploy new systems, I'm having to come up with names that fit into our naming convention. Our convention is supposed to be cartoon characters. Not all systems follow this convention, but most now do.
I am however, beginning to wonder if such a naming convention is even useful or warranted.
Some people say that you shouldn't name systems after who uses it or what the system does like Ascoble1, ExchangeBridgehead1, etc. This is so that someone can't simply look at system names after gaining entry into your network in order to crack the most important systems. After all if you are a hacker you are much less likely to attack a system named "JoeShmoe1" than "FileServer1".
Balancing the security concerns are always the concerns about usability. How easy is it for a user to remember the name of the server they need to access when they need to access it and does it make sense?
I think that for most companies, the issue of convenience outweighs the issue of security to some degree. If it isn't useful, then what is the point of having it after all. Which is why SSL websites are better than VPNs for applications that can be directly served off of a website. VPNs are more secure, but they are also much harder to set up, maintain and get users to use.
Would be interesting to hear what other IT professionals typically use for their naming conventions, but my guess is that it's usually driven by politics more than anything else. Then again that doesn't explain why a law firm is using cartoon characters as opposed to precedents (how about a system named RoeVWade) or law schools (Stanford, Michigan).
Then again I'm too busy to really start changing everything midstream, so instead I'm trying to be creative about coming up with new cartoon characters...Good thing I watch a lot of Anime, eh?
Then again, when I leave people are going to be saying "Why did he name these computers with Japanese names?"