On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 16:41:30 +0200, Ond?ej Surý <ond...@sury.org> wrote: >We might discuss whether recursive-name-server or caching-name-server >would be better match, but I think that not all recursive name server >has to be caching, but all caching name server has to be recursive. And >the IETF (at least the DNSSEC RFC) terminology uses "resolver" as the >term which is pretty close match to "recursive name server".
Other literature recommends the name "full service resolver" to distinguish from the "resolver" part of libc. The PowerDNS community, OTOH, just says "recursor". Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1vyekq-0008pb...@swivel.zugschlus.de
