Re: ietf-nntp Initial draft FINALLY available

[Evan Champion <[e-mail]>]

Stan Barber wrote:
> What is the point of having a IANA assigned port number then? What if I
> chose to run an HTTP server on port 119?

As I said in my last note, the reason is IMHO for interoperability
_only_.  You have to have some reference point for systems that wouldn't
otherwise know which port to connect to.  If you want to make
arrangements with your peers to do stock NNTP on a different port,
that's up to you (and there are lots of very logical reasons to do so,
as have been brought up by myself and other posters.)

One way to think of it is to divorce protocol from transport.  There is
no technical reason why NNTP _must_ run on 119/TCP (just like there is
no technical reason why NNTP must run over TCP, or that the servers be
connected by IP... )

If there is a technical justification for something then it should be
said with a MUST.  If something is being said as a suggestion (even a
strong suggestion) it should be said with a SHOULD.  IMHO MUST does not
apply here, but SHOULD certainly does.

Evan
--
Evan Champion            * Director, Network Operations
mailto:[e-mail] * Directeur, Exploitation du reseau
http://www.synapse.net/  * Synapse Internet