CI names

Discussion forum dedicated to configuration management and ITIL
Post Reply
User avatar
Moog
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 7:00 pm

Tue Jan 30, 2018 4:50 am

Hi Guys,

In our organisation we use the serial # of a piece of equipment as the CI name which seems a little counterintuitive to me.

I would think that the CI name should be some thing that identifies the CI and the serial # should be an attribute.

e.g. Database Server 1 with XYZ#77669123 as the serial #.

This way if I have to replace the server I simply change the serial # on the CI and all the relationships stay in place.

I'm not an ITIL professional so be gentle with me if I've got the wrong end of the stick.

Also interested how CI's and Assets should relate in the context of the above question.

Any help appreciated.

Cheers
Robert


User avatar
mosaic
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:00 pm

Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:05 pm

I would agree that a CI name should be some thing that identifies the CI and the serial # should be an attribute.

However if a server is replaced, changing the serial is a very dirty way of updating the CMDB. That CI should be disposed (the status set to disposed), and a new CI for the new server created, then the relationships created. This way the CMDB reflects what has happened, and has an accurate history.
User avatar
UKVIKING
Senior Itiler
Senior Itiler
Posts: 3623
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:00 pm
Location: London, UK

Fri Mar 30, 2018 2:51 am

Moog and Mosaic


not all CIs have serial numbers

the best CI name is the hostname of the device as one - note it - one of the key fields - IP Address is another as is serial number as is manufacturer nand product

It all depends
John Hardesty
ITSM Manager's Certificate (Red Badge)

Change Management is POWER & CONTROL. /....evil laughter
Post Reply