I'm sorry, but I still don't get that argument. If we allow multiple keystone proposals (and I really feel we shouldn't), then we end up with one of the following:
 - they're not installed on the same nodes/clusters => so it doesn't matter
 - they're installed on a cluster and one one node of the cluster => there will be a conflict for keystone.conf anyway
 - they're installed on the same cluster => there will be a conflict for keystone.conf anyway

(you could argue that we could eventually fix the keystone.conf conflict, to which I would reply that we would then fix the service name at the same time)

So I really don't believe we need to take into account the proposal name.