IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Question regarding RFC 8499

Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> Thu, 23 July 2020 17:55 UTC

Return-Path: <jabley@hopcount.ca>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69E873A0C8E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:55:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hopcount.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fy-LkV_gxifg for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:55:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72f.google.com (mail-qk1-x72f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 948863A0C96 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:55:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72f.google.com with SMTP id g26so6218227qka.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:55:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopcount.ca; s=google; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=rnBHi1yJ2spjdx67l0ToGQscS8odBEhovkWv9DXJIPA=; b=LgNa+Opb4JLxQ6aZUgbKMB/RApLAsrKy9izLR2+GGZ1t0irSjt0/PWHEQ3RO8vRoQA LR8pNSXH02YsbvyOy79cxyETd6ym9/dlRp92wfn3kqwemITSarkg7b8FjCUwlqiuTvbQ zi+qYp/ArZsGP1T5ITfyWocqZFOjvtnZBtiEM=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=rnBHi1yJ2spjdx67l0ToGQscS8odBEhovkWv9DXJIPA=; b=b0xTBNQnC1cTOOvtWMcOLiI584Wfm1a3bHzqhEGorZT4dIwXV+uEerWsk9ufCYdinf 8msINy7gQ6F8z8oPcPWlbfIiws/u9MVutkhfbu14c0lRutac1cYnaf6Fzfi9t6qnoB7w 6G+Bfha0+lD1VIMKASqNsm/PBktFbSNiSzlDzOxg8TtRuzqcnWMXQGuszO4G/8fq905+ 1yKe3dNBzMezpeD3dxriEeoSYMjLgVBtbaRSAodOit35BK3p50gDpkD1zA5pB1Rra8J6 IEXv+/nmpksDGvtjWrb3TnHzRenhaAkW+3e01UhEXdJAM0/55yvBA6pKBfM8Gt2z3gVh CeyA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533B+KVC0LkbW1/Ur/X2uGtrAH2xatuF9KewirLKHXf87JM4iXKX RqoCHl64pZX+IKV+ihPvO/O9GogqKorXnA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxV4TOX8fsjivHGtbK2xu6pMmvj9OUXLRVaDKb1Rea8QprFtDWTg10od5H4qhYvVQPedqnAxg==
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a0d1:: with SMTP id j200mr6482136qke.212.1595526947327; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:55:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.149] (24-246-23-138.cable.teksavvy.com. [24.246.23.138]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w11sm3139049qtk.35.2020.07.23.10.55.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
Message-Id: <395C33E7-103F-47E4-A859-A1849830B97E@hopcount.ca>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B41FBEB2-D733-41C4-8CA6-C6F8B329BC05"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 13:55:44 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CADyWQ+Fisgr3cNoTGiwrAgeEKrFfWEw=jxDCy_vm+Pf7XXE6cA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Edmonds <edmonds@mycre.ws>, dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
To: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <86c18e80-88ab-5503-f63c-f788766a2675@ghnou.su> <20200723172449.GA371024@mycre.ws> <1C6ACEA9-CCC5-41F5-AEAD-432B48370D12@hopcount.ca> <CADyWQ+Fisgr3cNoTGiwrAgeEKrFfWEw=jxDCy_vm+Pf7XXE6cA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/9l8H1LOSmzF9QrXt_1s5MWccUZU>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Question regarding RFC 8499
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 17:55:57 -0000

On 23 Jul 2020, at 13:44, Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 1:39 PM Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca <mailto:jabley@hopcount.ca>> wrote:
> 
> If we are looking for alternative terminology to master/slave (which I am not against, because change is a constant and inclusiveness and awareness amongst all industries is surely to be supported and encouraged) in my opinion we should find new words and not redefine or overload the common meaning of primary and secondary.
> 
> 
> Actually, that does make sense. Though we also have to expect that these existing terminology will not be replaced in the lexicon overnight.
> 
> The Chairs plan on having a few slides on this whole topic, as we've been thinking about it for some time. 

Allow me to preempt the inevitable infinite descent into the infinite rabbit bikeshed of naming and suggest upstream and downstream for master and slave. I feel like the DNS needs more fish analogies, even as I appreciate that we need to turn a blind eye to the shenanigans of frisky salmon as we firmly imagine data flowing only from the former to the latter.


Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email