Re: [DNSOP] Question regarding RFC 8499

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Wed, 05 August 2020 02:01 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
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 D06E73A1206 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 19:01:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 WkTTTNaw5jTp for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 19:00:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [24.104.150.213]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC9043A1186 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 19:00:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linux-9daj.localnet (dhcp-183.access.rits.tisf.net [24.104.150.183]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (1024 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 72DCCC3F19; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 02:00:58 +0000 (UTC)
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Cc: Michael De Roover <ietf@nixmagic.com>, dnsop@ietf.org, "StJohns, Michael" <msj@nthpermutation.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 02:00:58 +0000
Message-ID: <11014518.TrCllb3qF7@linux-9daj>
Organization: none
In-Reply-To: <CANeU+ZDEz5RMumhfGXmeD40pTni4VDaepana2G4y=nnDnSujFg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <86c18e80-88ab-5503-f63c-f788766a2675@ghnou.su> <1725851.NVhN7QJb2C@linux-9daj> <CANeU+ZDEz5RMumhfGXmeD40pTni4VDaepana2G4y=nnDnSujFg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/ErrzN9zbeW84wHd_ZkoEGL_yGcc>
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: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 02:01:01 -0000

On Wednesday, 5 August 2020 01:41:02 UTC StJohns, Michael wrote:
> How about source/sink?  Mike

if we need something specific to transfers, which describes transfer roles 
rather than server types, source/sink would be unambiguous in my opinion.

-- 
Paul