Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-09.txt> (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Procedures for the Management of the Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number Registry) to BCP

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On Jan 27, 2011, at 09:52, Lars Eggert wrote:

>> all new protocols should
>>  be security-capable

Sure.

How is this relevant?

In some protocols, there is value to use them without communication security (think TLS) for some applications, and with communication security for others.
We used to distinguish these two cases using two ports, now we use a single port plus per-connection negotiation like STARTLS.
I think the draft is trying to encourage this conversion, and I agree with this, at least where latency is less relevant.

With UDP-based protocols, it is harder to do this.
Please look at section 7.3 of

	http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-core-coap-04.html#section-7.3

and tell us whether this is how you would like this to be handled for UDP-based protocols in the future.
If not, we may want to add to the guidance in the (tsvwg) draft.

Gruesse, Carsten