[geeks] a little advice about DNS and naming conventions

[Greg A. Woods]

[ On Thursday, March 14, 2002 at 18:05:28 (-0800), Kurt Huhn wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: [geeks] a little advice about DNS and naming conventions
>
> Aren't we supposed to call them "child" nameservers now?

nope -- they are "slave" nameservers, and they slave from a "master",
and this time the config file uses the same terms too, so I don't see
how you could get confused about this....

> Besides.  WTF difference does it make?  Secondary and slave are
> equatable in the minds of a lot of people.

But in this context they are about a zillion miles appart -- completely
different and unrelated in any way.

The problem of course is that when you say 'secondary server' some idiot
will immediatley connote it as a 'backup' server, and then another idiot
comes along and says you need backups and you need secondary nameservers
therefore you must, by association, need secondary MXers.  Nothing could
be further from the truth.

-- 
								Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098;  <gwoods at acm.org>;  <g.a.woods at ieee.org>;  <woods at robohack.ca>
Planix, Inc. <woods at planix.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <woods at weird.com>