Re: [port-srv-reg] [tsvwg] "assigned" ( vs. "registered"), and relates issues
Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Mon, 18 January 2010 12:14 UTC
Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: port-srv-reg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: port-srv-reg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix)
with ESMTP id 2CE043A6921; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 04:14:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.044
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.044 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.095,
BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com
[127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5GXHIYWhKuOB;
Mon, 18 Jan 2010 04:14:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailgw5.ericsson.se (mailgw5.ericsson.se [193.180.251.36]) by
core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A94753A6767;
Mon, 18 Jan 2010 04:14:19 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb24-b7bb6ae000001052-f0-4b54509745c0
Received: from esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124])
by mailgw5.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id
EE.BC.04178.790545B4; Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:14:15 +0100 (CET)
Received: from esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.175]) by
esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:14:14 +0100
Received: from [147.214.183.147] ([147.214.183.147]) by
esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:14:14 +0100
Message-ID: <4B545096.4020300@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:14:14 +0100
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; sv-SE;
rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?UTF-8?B?QWxmcmVkIO+/vQ==?= <ah@TR-Sys.de>
References: <201001151840.TAA14644@TR-Sys.de>
In-Reply-To: <201001151840.TAA14644@TR-Sys.de>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jan 2010 12:14:14.0775 (UTC)
FILETIME=[C024F070:01CA9837]
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Cc: port-srv-reg@ietf.org, tsvwg@ietf.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [port-srv-reg] [tsvwg] "assigned" ( vs. "registered"),
and relates issues
X-BeenThere: port-srv-reg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of updates to service name and transport protocol port
registry <port-srv-reg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/port-srv-reg>,
<mailto:port-srv-reg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/port-srv-reg>
List-Post: <mailto:port-srv-reg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:port-srv-reg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/port-srv-reg>,
<mailto:port-srv-reg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:14:21 -0000
Hi Alfred, I have now read draft-gudmundsson-dnsext-srv-clarify-00 again. Me personally hasn't really digged into the issues that you bring up in your document, I don't think I am alone in this. Thus, I think it would be jumping to conclusions that there are agreement on your suggested approach simple because you haven't received comments on them yet. >From the perspective of trying to advance draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports, we do come down to trying to find the reasonable interface between our documents. On the issue of the protocol label for a given service name. I find it reasonable that your document do extended the registry with an additional column that enumerates any non-default protocol label order. I get the impression that you want this to be described in draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports due to that it should be included in any service name registration request. I had hoped that we could avoid normative dependencies from IANA ports towards draft-gudmundsson-dnsext-srv-clarify. This to enable draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports to be approved and published as soon as possible. >From my perspective I see three ways forward: 1. We write nothing about the protocol label in regards to Service name registrations and lets draft-gudmundsson-dnsext-srv-clarify update the Registration RFC. 2. We include some text about the need to specify protocol label priority list unless the default one (also included listed in draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports) but pushing of the explanation about the issues to your document using a normative reference. 3. We fudge something together in the middle trying to avoid a normative reference. I think I am leaning towards 1 personally even if it has some obvious downside in that the registration rules information will not be contained to a single document. However, I think IANA's registration template can clearly make it clear to applicants that you need to read things in both. Cheers Magnus Westerlund IETF Transport Area Director ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ericsson AB | Phone +46 10 7148287 Färögatan 6 | Mobile +46 73 0949079 SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Re: [port-srv-reg] [tsvwg] "assigned" ( vs. "regi… Alfred Hönes
- Re: [port-srv-reg] [tsvwg] "assigned" ( vs. "regi… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [port-srv-reg] [tsvwg] "assigned" ( vs. "regi… Olafur Gudmundsson
- Re: [port-srv-reg] [tsvwg] "assigned" ( vs. "regi… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] [tsvwg] "assigned" (vs. "regis… Alfred Hönes
- Re: [port-srv-reg] [tsvwg] "assigned" (vs. "regis… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] [tsvwg] "assigned" (vs. "regis… Alfred Hönes
- Re: [port-srv-reg] [tsvwg] "assigned" (vs. "regis… Joe Touch
- [port-srv-reg] final updates - ports doc Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] final updates - ports doc Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] final updates - ports doc Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [port-srv-reg] final updates - ports doc Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [port-srv-reg] final updates - ports doc Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] final updates - ports doc Joe Touch
- [port-srv-reg] status check Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] status check Mark Mcfadden
- Re: [port-srv-reg] status check Pearl Liang
- Re: [port-srv-reg] status check Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] status check Michelle Cotton
- Re: [port-srv-reg] status check Lars Eggert
- [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates - por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] final updates - ports doc Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] final updates - ports doc Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [port-srv-reg] final updates - ports doc Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… David Harrington
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] ACTION ITEMS - final updates -… Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] status check Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] status check Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] status check Gorry Fairhurst