<div dir="ltr"><div>[ Classification Level: <font color="green">PUBLIC</font> ]</div><br class="cursAfter">My 2 cents...<div><br></div><div>The "master" nomenclature is appropriate from a *data*dependency* standpoint. The "master" holds the "master copy" of the zone contents (
<a href="https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/master-copy">https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/master-copy</a>). All other copies are duplicates of that.</div><div><br></div><div>Where it is inaccurate, is from a *functional* perspective, describing replication. The so-called "master" doesn't reach out and *force* the "slaves" to replicate the zone. It can send a NOTIFY, but that's just a suggestion. Whenever an entity can choose to act, or not act, then "slave" is the wrong term to use. Real-life slaves had no such freedom.</div><div><br></div><div>DNS has always had this dual identity as both a database architecture and a network connectivity architecture. So, I would say, keep the "master" terminology only in the context of the database aspects of DNS, maybe limited to combining phrases such as "master file" or "master copy". When discussing replication, however, perhaps it is more appropriate to switch to the primary/secondary nomenclature, or maybe even replication-client/replication-server nomenclature.</div><div><br></div><div> - Kevin</div><div> <br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 2:17 PM Michael De Roover <<a href="mailto:isc@nixmagic.com">isc@nixmagic.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Of course I could, but I do not feel like the effort to change
nomenclature is either beneficial or worth taking for granted the
requests of some people on Twitter - as the slave to peer
authority I am - given how much it affects documentation, code,
comments, general environment of the projects themselves. I enjoy
being surrounded by people much smarter than I am when it comes to
the mailing list here. Let's keep it that way and not derange
ourselves into meaningless blabber from social media.</p>
<p>What I did notice over time however that most of the projects
affected are also those who do have to maintain a good public
image, usually corporations. Meanwhile projects such as <a href="https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941" target="_blank">Opal</a> and
recently <a href="https://github.com/rubocop-hq/rubocop/issues/8091" target="_blank">Rubocop</a>
as well were not. The latter one I'd like to draw attention to.
The maintainer clearly didn't ask for this and asked everyone who
shamed him, why are you doing this? None of the complainers were
affiliated to the project at all. Chances are that they weren't
even using it and just searched for projects with the name "cop"
in it instead. These are not the people I want to support in my
effort to end racism, which I <i>do</i> support, and quite
heavily so.<br>
</p>
<div>On 6/15/20 8:00 PM, DeCaro, James John
(Jim) CIV DISA FE (USA) wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Or you can call the slave servers 'secondary' servers.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<div>-- <br>
Met vriendelijke groet / Best regards,<br>
Michael De Roover</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Please visit <a href="https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users</a> to unsubscribe from this list<br>
<br>
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at <a href="https://www.isc.org/contact/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.isc.org/contact/</a> for more information.<br>
<br>
<br>
bind-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:bind-users@lists.isc.org" target="_blank">bind-users@lists.isc.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>