Re: [Int-area] [ih] Fwd: Existing use of IP protocol 114 (any 0-hop protocol)

On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 7:02 PM John Gilmore <gnu@toad.com> wrote:

> Protocol 114 was unassigned in RFC 1700 in Oct 1994, which was the last
> RFC tabulating protocol assignments.  In January 2002, RFCs ceased being
> published for protocol number assignments, according to RFC 3232.
> Sometime before Feb 1999, protocol 114 was assigned here:
>
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/19990203044112/http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/protocol-numbers
>
>

I looked at this document.
It looks like many listed there are no longer used/exist.
Maybe deprecating them and thereby making the numbers available for
assignment seem like something IETF/IESG can do?

Behcet

> The original IANA, Jon Postel, died on October 16, 1998.  There was some
> turmoil in the relevant websites at the time.  The Internet Archive's
> Wayback Machine does not appear to have captured the IANA.org or isi.edu
> websites during an earlier time when this protocol number was not
> assigned.  But, only five assignments in Feb 1999 had followed 114; the
> next one was L2TP (protocol 115) by Bernard Aboba (April 1998).  The
> preceding one was PGM (protocol 113) by Tony Speakman in January 1998.
> So it's a pretty good bet that it was assigned by Postel between January
> and April 1998.
>
> (L2TP was documented in RFC 2661 of August 1999, and by that point it was
> not using protocol #115; it ran over IP and UDP on port 1701.  A later
> 2005 evolution of L2TP, L2TPv3, used protocol 115.)
>
> Does anyone have archives of the TCP-IP Distribution List from 1998?
> The only copy I have found so far is at
> http://securitydigest.org/tcp-ip/ but it ends in 1994 (with no apparent
> "we're closing down the list" messages).
>
> A separate issue:
>
> Having read the draft-zhu-intarea-gma-03.txt, and skimmed the 2017
> draft-kanugovi-intarea-mams-protocol-03 that it references, I don't see
> how this protocol could in any way be seen as a 0-hop protocol.  The
> whole design is to provide multiple paths to the Internet, which would
> require that the relevant packets traverse routers.  The MAMS draft
> explicitly says "MAMS routes user plane data packets at the IP layer".
> 0-hop protocols only operate on a single LAN and cannot be routed, by
> definition.  (ARP, DHCP or its predecessor BOOTP are examples of 0-hop
> protocols.)
>
> Therefore, I think this draft should not be using protocol 114.
>
>         John
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>