Re: [DNSOP] Terminology question: split DNS

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Mon, 19 March 2018 21:14 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.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 A95161270A0 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.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 gcF-mAu2zsVK for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07F41127058 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 14:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 404pjk0nXszCy6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 22:14:50 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1521494090; bh=V3GJ3pW6oFRw4J6LGmIyZJ2aElnfYJF91PRevBhRNzc=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=ApBy/ulV/rfWIk9A88+EONiSDNZ/r6PogiBDiU0QjN08LvEGq2yr7+EXUIiNfomrK JzEZwBl9b5p5z1qGR+BAKSy2bLSKMhGz6ixX/kxjEDvixlMUh3QWf/9DvawXy28xqx ITtgjMemai0G0nntkOFxHvGr+6eqXvsvk43NL1rs=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nqqlyalrrB3V for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 22:14:48 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 22:14:47 +0100 (CET)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E8479C98; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 17:14:46 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bofh.nohats.ca E8479C98
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAB2D40007E9 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Mar 2018 17:14:46 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 17:14:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <9098.1521492996@dash.isi.edu>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1803191711420.12290@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <3D490CA8-0733-47AD-A088-113B1116B207@vpnc.org> <CAKr6gn0RrJEzLCg-nzmwpY7R4XUtRXudQZWdgpz2Vt3X1+BL4Q@mail.gmail.com> <D2E84EBB-9AE5-469B-B8A5-37DBD9CD8D44@fugue.com> <5AB00268.4040902@redbarn.org> <9098.1521492996@dash.isi.edu>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/YK52z28khe5KeYU0v9WR7wrhvcM>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Terminology question: split DNS
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 21:14:56 -0000

On Mon, 19 Mar 2018, John Heidemann wrote:

> +1 on "split-horizon dns" as the term, over "split dns" and some other
> neologism, on the basis of running code and existing documentation and
> existing wide use.

I and google disagree:

"split dns":  72900 hits
"split horizon dns": 5640 hits


If the document is about explaining terminology, it must explain "split
dns" and can say another term for it is "split horizon dns", but not the
other way around.

I personally don't hear (or use) "split horizon dns"

Paul