Are y'all looking at the -01 draft? Because it defines "primary server" and
"primary master", both using quotes from RFCs. Are those quotes not correct?
--Paul Hoffman
___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 6:52 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> Paul Hoffman wrote:
>
> > Greetings again. Based on Casey's proposal, I would like to make the
> > following changes. Thoughts?
>
> I'm not entirely sure, because it loses the RFC 2136 concept of "primary
> master" which is the root of the zone
Paul Hoffman wrote:
> Greetings again. Based on Casey's proposal, I would like to make the
> following changes. Thoughts?
I'm not entirely sure, because it loses the RFC 2136 concept of "primary
master" which is the root of the zone transfer / update forwarding graph,
and I think demoting "prima
Greetings again. Based on Casey's proposal, I would like to make the following
changes. Thoughts?
--Paul Hoffman
CURRENT:
Primary servers and secondary servers --- These are synonyms for "master
server" and "slave server",
which were the terms used in the early DNS RFCs, and defined below. The
