uyuni
uyuni copied to clipboard
uyuni-project
Server installation mentions FQHN instead of FQDN
Problem description
During the installation of the Uyuni server, @mtravitzky saw an error mentioning Illegal FQHN and we were both wondering what is meant with that and if it could be a typo or at least not the appropriate term.
@juliogonzalez already found an RFC mentioning an FQHN: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2109
Fully-qualified host name (FQHN) means either the fully-qualified domain name (FQDN) of a host (i.e., a completely specified domain name ending in a top-level domain such as .com or .uk), or the numeric Internet Protocol (IP) address of a host. The fully qualified domain name is preferred; use of numeric IP addresses is strongly discouraged.
A simple search in the code revealed 16 files that mention FQHN: https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Auyuni-project%2Fuyuni+FQHN&type=code
It needs to be clarified, if the term should be left this way, replaced with FQDN or if we should use a different sentence. The documentation mentions FQDN.
Steps to reproduce
- Do an Uyuni server installation
- When setting up the server and specifying an FQDN, use a wrong one
- Observer the
Illegal FQHNwarning you see in the screenshot below
Uyuni version
2023.04
Uyuni proxy version (if used)
No response
Useful logs
No response
Additional information
@nodeg does YaST support an IP there? And if so... does Uyuni work later?
The message says $it needs at least two dots. That only makes sense when $it means a domain name, not an IP address. Asking for two dots is, btw, ambiguous: do we ask for suma.example.com or example.com.?
At least, but it can be more.
An IPv4 address has three (1.1.1.1), and a FQDN/FQHN can have three as well (uyuni.eu.example.com) or more.
But on the other hand IPv6 has none at all.
But I agree, even saying two is ambiguous.
What it comes down to is this case: is uyuni.showtime. the kind of FQDN Uyuni can work with ?
If not, the message needs an update. It would be enough to include that a trailing dot is not counted towards the two (or phrased differently, we need at least 3 non-empty labels).
Yes, but there's also the question about FQDN vs FQHN... according to what @Bischoff said, the doc clearly says they are not (I never tested it myself, but I don't see a good reason for using an IP to identify the server and emit the SSL certificate, etc, in particular not when remembering IPv6 will be next to impossible).
Hey everyone. The conversation is stale for some time already. Do you have any other suggestions?
