> Hmm. What if this changed to "The identifier of an individual node in > the sequence of nodes identifier by a fully-qualified domain name"? I > think that would get rid of the quibble you have and still emphasise > that it's one node in a sequence. > > The point is that the label is an identifier of a node, not the node > itself. The discussion of this in RFC 1034 is quite long and never > actually offers the definition as such. So we want to note that the > label identifies one node in the sequence of nodes. > > Does that work? Yes, that works with a minor typo fix: "sequence of nodes identifier" -> "sequence of nodes identified" And we agree on the primary point of my original comment. Thanks, --David > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Sullivan [mailto:ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 12:03 PM > To: Black, David > Cc: Paul Hoffman; dnsop@xxxxxxxx; General Area Review Team (gen-art@xxxxxxxx); > ops-dir@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-dnsop-dns- > terminology-03 > > Hi, > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 01:28:11PM +0000, Black, David wrote: > > > > [B] 2. Names - p.4 > > > > > > > > Label: The identifier of an individual node in the sequence of nodes > > > > that comprise a fully-qualified domain name. > > > In other words, I would have expected the fully-qualified domain name > > to be a sequence of labels, each of which is an identifier that identifies > > a node, making a fully qualified domain name a "sequence of identifiers", > > not a "sequence of nodes". Of course the "sequence of identifiers" in > > an FQDN identifies a "sequence of nodes". > > Hmm. What if this changed to "The identifier of an individual node in > the sequence of nodes identifier by a fully-qualified domain name"? I > think that would get rid of the quibble you have and still emphasise > that it's one node in a sequence. > > The point is that the label is an identifier of a node, not the node > itself. The discussion of this in RFC 1034 is quite long and never > actually offers the definition as such. So we want to note that the > label identifies one node in the sequence of nodes. > > Does that work? > > A > > > -- > Andrew Sullivan > ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx