Did you mean ceph-daemon, or perhaps ceph-volume?
Perhaps, all of these design points trace back to a
single idea - support multiple ceph clusters on the same set of machine(s). Is this the
goal? Is this want Ceph users want?
Custom cluster names were originally intended for this purpose, though there were some
gaps in implemention. When custom cluster names began to be deprecated, it was claimed
that almost nobody ever made us of this functionality. So unless there’s been a radical
shift, multiple clusters on the same set of systems is not a concern going forward.