Fwd: Request to use "Canonical/Mirror"

[Greg Choules]

Hi Felicia.
As the previous responder said, don't think of entire servers being one or
the other, it's individual zones.

IMHO the terms "primary" and "secondary" are just as meaningful as the
terms "master" and "slave", but without the emotional and historical
baggage. You just have to give yourself time to get used to them.

Cheers, Greg

On Sat, 14 May 2022 at 00:11, Felicia P <felicia at picorealm.net> wrote:

> Hello, I see that ISC updated terminology for BIND9 to use
> primary/secondary in addition to the original master/slave which many
> projects have been deprecating.
>
> In the context of BIND9, it seems that 'primary/secondary' is less clear
> than master/slave.
>
> My understanding is that it is possible to have a standalone BIND server
> that is running as a 'master' yet acting as a 'secondary' for a
> particular domain.  In this context, secondary doesn't necessarily refer
> to the 'slave' status of the server, but that it is sort of like a
> backup server in the event that the primary is unavailable.
>
> Given this, it seems like instead of 'primary/secondary', a better
> choice of terms would be 'canonical/mirror' which unambiguously conveys
> the roles of respective servers and does not overlap with other contexts
> or meanings of primary/secondary.
>
>
>
> --
> Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
> from this list
>
> ISC funds the development of this software with paid support
> subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more
> information.
>
>
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20220516/02ef2b4a/attachment-0001.htm>