On Mon, May 1, 2023 at 16:24, Mark Delany <[m...@india.emu.st](mailto:On Mon,
May 1, 2023 at 16:24, Mark Delany <<a href=)> wrote:
> On 01May23, John Kristoff apparently wrote:
>> (usually due to a bad configuration)
>
> Was any "lame" situation defined which wasn't the result of a bad
> configuration?
Yes -- some people (not me) would evidently describe a server that they didn't
receive a response from as lame. Such a situation could be a result of a bad
configuration but also any number of other things, such as a network problem or
a misconfigured firewall.
From one conversation off-list, I think part of the problem with this word
results from regional differences in language. To me the word "lame" is a
synonym for "cripplied" in the sense of not being able to walk or run as
expected, which seems like a reasonable analogy for a server that is badly
configured (albeit one that is a bit uncomfortably ableist). To others it just
means generally bad.
Joe
>
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
