Re: [DNSOP] Terminology: "primary master"

[Matthew Pounsett <[e-mail]>]

On 23 November 2017 at 06:19, Havard Eidnes <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> draft 07 says:
>
>    Primary master:  "The primary master is named in the zone's SOA MNAME
>       field and optionally by an NS RR".  (Quoted from [RFC1996],
>       Section 2.1).  [RFC2136] defines "primary master" as "Master
>       server at the root of the AXFR/IXFR dependency graph.  The primary
>       master is named in the zone's SOA MNAME field and optionally by an
>       NS RR.  There is by definition only one primary master server per
>       zone."  The idea of a primary master is only used by [RFC2136],
>       and is considered archaic in other parts of the DNS.
>
> First: the last sentence's claim that the idea of a "primary
> master" is only used by RFC 2136 is surely incorrect.  It is also
> used in RFC 1996, where the first quote is taken from.
>

I think the intent of the text is that an name is only used by the protocol
in RFC 2136.  It is referenced as a concept in RFC 1996, but not used by
the protocol.  But I agree that the text above is confusing, and if that's
the intent then it should be rewritten.


>
> Secondly: can someone please explain to me why the idea of a
> "primary master" where the zone data originates from and where
> updates are performed is considered archaic?
>

That doesn't make sense to me either.  Perhaps somebody thinks that Update
messages are no longer in use?