On May 11, 2011, at 5:25 PM, Joe Touch wrote: > Hi, all, > > Although this is a minor point, it's also easy to address: > > On 5/4/2011 4:56 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > ... >> Meanwhile, the discussion about whether or not to call this >> "whitelisting" is pointless. The term is already well-established. > > That's true, but equally true that the terms for disk drives used to use > terms "master" and "slave" - equally antiquated and potentially racially > charged terms. FWIW, the Los Angeles County banned the terms in 2003 when > used for various purposes - including technology, preferring "primary" and > "secondary", in specific. The terms don't even appear in the ATA spec after > version 1. > > For the terms in this doc, alternatives that do not require explanation (and > aren't potentially racially charged) include "permit list" and "deny list".
the blacklist originates with charles the 2nd. it has no racial connotations in that context. see also the death of cromwell and the resortation. > Joe > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6...@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
