Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Terminology: primary, secondary, master, slave

From: Tony Finch <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 11:52:26 +0100

Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Greetings again. Based on Casey's proposal, I would like to make the
> following changes. Thoughts?

I'm not entirely sure, because it loses the RFC 2136 concept of "primary
master" which is the root of the zone transfer / update forwarding graph,
and I think demoting "primary" to the weaker meaning that "master" has
would be confusing.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <[email-masked]>  http://dotat.at/
Irish Sea: East 4 or 5, veering southeast 5 to 7, perhaps gale 8 later. Slight
or moderate, becoming moderate or rough. Occasional rain later. Good, becoming
moderate or poor later.

---

From: Shumon Huque <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 13:09:02 -0400

> and I think demoting "primary" to the weaker meaning that "master" has

I agree. My suggestion is to add a definition for "Primary Master" and
remove "Primary". Then we end up with:

Primary Master server
Master server
Secondary server (synonym: Slave server)

Shumon Huque

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 11:31:46 -0700

Are y'all looking at the -01 draft? Because it defines "primary server" and "primary master", both using quotes from RFCs. Are those quotes not correct?

--Paul Hoffman