John,
I am wondering if master/copy would be appropriate since that is what do we in a number of cases.
As with things like recordings (e..g music, video, etc) , we have a master of information and copies which operate quite independently. This use of the term - “master” - is not connected with the historical issues with the previous terms.
Not specifically advocating for this per se.
Regards,
Victor K
On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 18:12 John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote:
--On Monday, July 27, 2020 09:32 +1200 Jay Daley <jay@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> A question I can't resolve by Googling - has anyone
> attempted to create entirely new words to represent the
> concepts that master or slave have been used to represent?
> e.g. a word that means "authoritative source of data that has
> no dependency on another source" and has no other meaning?
Jay,
At least in the DNS sense, some of us (despite being old white
guys with white beards) have objected to "master/slave" for
years, not just because the usage may be offensive but because
it is wrong technically. In that context, the so-called slave
is actually fairly independent. It (or its operators) decide
when check for and fetch relevant values (whether based on
timeouts or on server request) and can reject and not install
such updates.
Unfortunately, in the DNS context, "authoritative" means someone
else, but "primary" and "secondary" have been used for years.
Of course, someone could probably find those offensive too, but
then we get into problems with, e.g., "Director" ("Executive" or
otherwise).
john
