Re: [DNSOP] Terminology: "primary master"

["Paul Hoffman" <[e-mail]>]

On 27 Nov 2017, at 5:22, Tony Finch wrote:

> Joe Abley <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> On Nov 23, 2017, at 12:44, Tony Finch <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> It's quite difficult to have multiple masters and DNSSEC and 
>>> coherent
>>> copies of the zone from all masters - i.e. more effort than just 
>>> spinning
>>> up parallel instances of BIND or Knot in automatic signing mode.
>>
>> Note that I wasn't talking about multiple signers; I was talking 
>> about
>> (from the perspective of one particular slave) having multiple 
>> masters
>> available to serve precisely the same zone.
>
> A primary master is wrt a zone not a server - a zone's primary master 
> is
> a server that's authoritative for a zone and which does not get the 
> zone
> contents via axfr/ixfr, but instead from a master file and/or UPDATE 
> (or
> a non-standard mechanism such as directly from a database).

That sounds correct. It also sounds quite different than what is defined 
in RFC 1996 and RFC 2136. How is this for new wording?

The idea of a primary master is only used in <xref target="RFC1996"/> 
and <xref target="RFC2136"/>, and is considered archaic in other
parts of the DNS. A modern interpretation of the term "primary master" 
is a server that is both authoritative for a zone and that gets its 
updates to the zone from configuration (such as a master file) or from 
UPDATE transactions.

--Paul Hoffman