> On Jun 15, 2020, at 3:24 PM, Brett Delmage wrote:
>
> On Mon, 15 Jun 2020, Evan Hunt wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 06:38:38PM -0400, Brett Delmage wrote:
>>> Is this ARM the most recent version?
>>
>> No, the current stable release is 9.16. The "primary" and "secondary"
>> keywords
On Mon, 15 Jun 2020, Evan Hunt wrote:
On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 06:38:38PM -0400, Brett Delmage wrote:
Is this ARM the most recent version?
No, the current stable release is 9.16. The "primary" and "secondary"
keywords were added in 9.12.
Then is the ISC ARM directory page
We have decided to put the list into general moderation because it feels like
there is nothing substantive to add on this topic and it seems like we might
benefit from a cooling off period before anyone gets more upset. We will push
through any posts on any other topic (about BIND anyway), and
Wow. This topic has generated a lot of comment.
We at ISC decided in 2017 to provide aliases for the master/slave terminology
in BIND so users who don’t wish to use those terms don’t have to. It was not a
burden to make this change in the source code.
Back when we made that initial change,
People call me weeb and say the word autistic often, which are because..
well, I am a weeb (as in I like anime) and some conversations on the
internet are just autistic. I have Asperger's Syndrome and am a weeb
myself. I am not offended by either, short of people inappropriately
calling me so
I have been teaching informal DNS classes at work for decades, and I used to be
very careful to use “master” and “slave” and would include a section where I
pointed out that using “primary” and “secondary” instead was not correct. Then
about 10 years ago one person in class pointed out to me
Hi there,
On Mon, 15 Jun 2020, bind-users-requ...@lists.isc.org wrote - and wrote, and
wrote:
... [all sniped] ...
Please guys[1], stop it.
--
73,
Ged.
[1] The masculine embraces the feminine where the context permits.
___
Please visit
I just got into a disagreement with a couple of people on this. I’m sure this
won’t be much different.
My feeling is that we’re dealing with software and things here and not people.
A Master is simply an authoritative source in this context. It has nothing to
do with enslaving human beings.
On Mon, 15 Jun 2020, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 10:38 AM Tony Finch wrote:
Vin?cius Ferr?o via bind-users wrote:
But the prevalence of terms are still master and slave. And I really
hope this thing of changing nomenclatures doesn?t go any further due to
political
This whole discussion seems so misguided.
The TLDR; version, at least for me is;
Does it really cost you that much to use language that's polite and kind to
those around you, and change that language to live up to those ideals when you
can?
Sure you _have the right_ to run down the street and
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 10:38 AM Tony Finch wrote:
>
> Vinícius Ferrão via bind-users wrote:
> >
> > But the prevalence of terms are still master and slave. And I really
> > hope this thing of changing nomenclatures doesn’t go any further due to
> > political correctness.
>
> "Political
Completely aside from the topic at hand, I often like to think that
after a few years I mastered something. System administration,
electronics, programming, whatever has piqued my interest for several
years already and got me to invest in it. It is never true. The first
profession I pursued
Kevin Darcy wrote:
>
> The "master" nomenclature is appropriate from a *data*dependency*
> standpoint. The "master" holds the "master copy" of the zone contents (
> https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/master-copy). All
> other copies are duplicates of that.
There isn't in
After I feel I have mastered DNS and BIND after slaving over the docs and
code for years (I'm not there yet, and I have not) how am I going to
communicate this to people?
How will I be able to master anything technical anymore? Should I just
stop trying?
Thesaurus.com suggests that one
I sense an RFC has already dictated primary and secondary but, if not and we're
going to go to the trouble of renaming something, let's name it right such as
"source" and "copy".
From: bind-users on behalf of Tim Daneliuk
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 1:33 PM
On 6/15/20 1:15 PM, Michael De Roover wrote:
> Of course I could, but I do not feel like the effort to change nomenclature
> is either beneficial or worth taking for granted the requests of some people
> on Twitter - as the slave to peer authority I am - given how much it affects
>
Of course I could, but I do not feel like the effort to change
nomenclature is either beneficial or worth taking for granted the
requests of some people on Twitter - as the slave to peer authority I am
- given how much it affects documentation, code, comments, general
environment of the
Some servers already do
Regards
Ben Lavender
On Mon, 15 Jun 2020, 19:02 DeCaro, James John (Jim) CIV DISA FE (USA) via
bind-users, wrote:
> Or you can call the slave servers 'secondary' servers.
>
>
> V/R
> Jim DeCaro
> DISA
> Systems Administrator
> Windows and Unix Server Operations
>
Or you can call the slave servers 'secondary' servers.
V/R
Jim DeCaro
DISA
Systems Administrator
Windows and Unix Server Operations
FE222/DoDNet Service Section
Defense Enclave Services Directorate
☎ 301-225-8180
☎ 301-375-8180
james.j.decaro3@mail.mil
james.j.decaro3@mail.smil.mil
I concur with this. I'm still fairly new to BIND and DNS myself. I
maintain 7 name servers (3 internal, 4 external) and master does signify
to me that this is the server in control of the zone files for the other
ones in that pool. The slaves are pretty much that to me, they take the
zone
The terminology is fairly misleading, as in the slave is not doing the
work on-behalf of or instruction of the the master. But there is ways
for the master to influence the slaves; such as "allow-transfer".
I don't see the big issue with making a terminology change in this case.
On 15/06/2020
Vinícius Ferrão via bind-users wrote:
>
> But the prevalence of terms are still master and slave. And I really
> hope this thing of changing nomenclatures doesn’t go any further due to
> political correctness.
"Political correctness" just means being considerate for other people,
especially
Steffen Breitbach via bind-users wrote:
>
> I am having issues with my bind server setup. When I try to resolve the PTR
> for 130.248.154.166 or 172.82.233.25, I will get the proper result only after
> a few tries so. After that, resolving will work.
Looks like there are some discrepancies with
Hi Brett,
BIND 9 already uses primary/secondary as keywords and we are actively
working on updating BIND 9 to match the canon defined in RFC 8499.
You can find the latest documentation from the BIND 9 development branch
here: https://bind9.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
Cheers,
Ondrej
--
Ondřej Surý
Totally not BIND related, but in BDSM "top" and "bottom" are quite
widely used. So there is a non-slavery-related nomenclature there as well.
Am 15.06.20 um 00:53 schrieb Vinícius Ferrão via bind-users:
> ISC had a statement about it a time
> ago:
25 matches
Mail list logo
