Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Sun, 26 July 2020 22:11 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3755D3A14DA; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 15:11:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 xh2koQzh67n3; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 15:11:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DB2D3A14D9; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 15:11:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1jzorx-000Pay-7K; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 18:11:45 -0400
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 18:11:40 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>, IETF list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: IESG Statement On Oppressive or Exclusionary Language
Message-ID: <B3D005AE195B6A0A766222B2@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <30F40837-55D3-4504-8310-AD387B156408@ietf.org>
References: <159552214576.23902.6025318815034036362@ietfa.amsl.com> <dc32abdd-d361-a81b-a61d-4f4f69443e22@si6networks.com> <6E23B161-6CA0-40D1-A37A-6F0F79A90EB2@strayalpha.com> <cc5ee354-8307-a8ab-bfe0-522dc593d43d@acm.org> <EBDE082B-5663-47A1-820E-EBAEC75A36DC@tzi.org> <30F40837-55D3-4504-8310-AD387B156408@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/RVuK0q3MbAh4Vg1deB9XSJttCoE>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 22:11:49 -0000


--On Monday, July 27, 2020 09:32 +1200 Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>
wrote:

> A question I can't resolve by Googling - has anyone
> attempted to create entirely new words to represent the
> concepts that master or slave have been used to represent?
> e.g. a word that means "authoritative source of data that has
> no dependency on another source" and has no other meaning?

Jay,

At least in the DNS sense, some of us (despite being old white
guys with white beards) have objected to "master/slave" for
years, not just because the usage may be offensive but because
it is wrong technically.   In that context, the so-called slave
is actually fairly independent.  It (or its operators) decide
when check for and fetch relevant values (whether based on
timeouts or on server request) and can reject and not install
such updates.

Unfortunately, in the DNS context, "authoritative" means someone
else, but "primary" and "secondary" have been used for years.
Of course, someone could probably find those offensive too, but
then we get into problems with, e.g., "Director" ("Executive" or
otherwise).

    john