I attended my first DNS Training course presented by Bill Manning at
ICANN Rio de Janeiro March 2003.
In December 2004, ICANN came to Cape Town - and Johan Ihrén (now
Stenstam) and Bill Manning taught DNS together.
Anyway, we (UniForum S.A. - now ZARC) started presenting DNS Training in
South
On Sunday, February 9, 2025 12:54:53 PM CET Michael De Roover wrote:
> Perhaps this would be as good of an email as any to express that I once
> walked the corridors with this teacher-
Not sure to which extent this will be necessary, but by this I meant my own
teacher Gitte. I should really learn
On Sunday, February 9, 2025 11:45:52 AM CET Carsten Strotmann via bind-users
wrote:
> I've been teaching DNS for over 30 years now, and I have always been uneasy
> using the old terms. I've used to "dance around" them, mentioning them once
> and using different terms all along in the training. T
Hi,
On 9 Feb 2025, at 7:35, Michael De Roover wrote:
> I for
> one look forward to seeing what people from various parts of the world have
> to say about
> it.
I've been teaching DNS for over 30 years now, and I have always been uneasy
using the old terms. I've used to "dance around" them, men
On Sunday, February 9, 2025 7:16:16 AM CET Ondřej Surý wrote:
> I absolute agree that the context matters. But there are more contexts - the
> historical context and the current discourse context. You can’t ignore
> either.
>
> From historical context, we can probably deduce that the word “groper”
> On 9. 2. 2025, at 5:35, Michael De Roover wrote:
>
> Long story short, context matters. Paul Vixie made the context pretty clear,
> as an authoritative figure. Perhaps we were mistaken to tie slavery into this
> discussion in the first place. Or perhaps the designers at the time were
> mistake
> On 7. 2. 2025, at 9:05, Bjørn Mork via bind-users
> wrote:
>
> Not sure where to draw the line. Are the 2024 rules final, or are we
> going to continue this whack-a-mole game forever?
This question is a logical fallacy. The society evolves and the technology
cannot be ignorant to the chang
On Friday, February 7, 2025 9:05:16 AM CET Bjørn Mork via bind-users wrote:
> Personally I am mostly worried about the potentional number of technical
> terms we have not yet identified as "bad". The set of words we may have
> to replace in the future is virtually unlimited. Most colours are
> ob
Terminology, Power, and Exclusionary Language in Internet-Drafts and RFCs
Abstract
This document argues for more inclusive language conventions
sometimes used by RFC authors and the RFC Production Centre in
Internet-Drafts that are work in progress, and in new RFCs tha
Greg Choules via bind-users writes:
> What's a "primary master" as opposed to (presumably?) a "secondary master"?
Some servers will be both masters and slaves when using hierarchical
replication. It is useful to define the root of the tree as "primary
master" and refer to any upstream from a "s
On 2/6/25 08:40, Greg Choules via bind-users wrote:
In DNS terms, for me, a "primary" has the single source of truth for
data in zones and a "secondary" transfers a temporary copy of that data
from a primary, or from another secondary (though daisy chain
secondaries at your peril). All are auth
Hi Paul.
What's a "primary master" as opposed to (presumably?) a "secondary master"?
Maybe there are just too many combinations and permutations of type of box
for a single word to convey all meanings, though I haven't encountered any
yet. Even in an environment like Active Directory, where all se
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 09:11:32 +0100
Ondřej Surý wrote:
> Hey,
>
> since you've asked about ISC recommendations and good practice,
> we prefer to use the current DNS terminology as defined in RFC 8499[1]
> that says:
>
> > Although early DNS RFCs such as [RFC1996] referred to this as a "master",
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
