Re: [port-srv-reg] "assigned"
Michelle Cotton <michelle.cotton@icann.org> Sat, 16 January 2010 04:14 UTC
Return-Path: <michelle.cotton@icann.org>
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 32DEA3A6881 for <port-srv-reg@core3.amsl.com>;
Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:14:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.128
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.128 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.129,
BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_23=0.6, 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 Xhh8hYyBSc04 for
<port-srv-reg@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:14:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EXPFE100-2.exc.icann.org (expfe100-2.exc.icann.org
[64.78.22.237]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F3CB3A6848 for
<port-srv-reg@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:14:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org ([64.78.22.232]) by
EXPFE100-2.exc.icann.org ([64.78.22.237]) with mapi;
Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:14:42 -0800
From: Michelle Cotton <michelle.cotton@icann.org>
To: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:18:11 -0800
Thread-Topic: [port-srv-reg] "assigned"
Thread-Index: AcqSjsvJetFLfOS3TvawmXWbHaoJSwD1B4zM
Message-ID: <C7767E03.1F868%michelle.cotton@icann.org>
In-Reply-To: <6C77BDEE-0D03-45D0-8CCC-FFD67068EB3E@nokia.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "port-srv-reg@ietf.org" <port-srv-reg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [port-srv-reg] "assigned"
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: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 04:14:46 -0000
Lars and Fernando, This error has been corrected. Thank you, Michelle On 1/10/10 11:17 PM, "Lars Eggert" <lars.eggert@nokia.com> wrote: > Hi, > > has there been any action around this wrt updating > http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers? The page still says: > > The range for assigned ports managed by the IANA is 0-1023. > and > The Registered Ports are in the range 1024-49151. > > After our discussion, I understand that registered and assigned mean the same > thing, right? So the former should probably be change to "system" or "well > known" ports. There should probably also be a sentence in the beginning of the > page that clarifies that IANA manages to ports from 0-49151. > > Lars > > PS: CC'ing Fernando, since this is relevant for his port-randomization draft. > > > > On 2009-12-11, at 0:54, Michelle Cotton wrote: > >> In the ports registry the ranges are described as follows: >> >> System (Well-Known) Port Numbers 0-1023 >> User (Registered) Port Numbers 1024-49152 >> >> Maybe that was meant to say ³system² ports or as Joe said, maybe the range >> should be corrected. >> >> Michelle >> >> On 12/4/09 1:58 PM, "Joe Touch" <touch@ISI.EDU> wrote: >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> >> >> Lars Eggert wrote: >>> From http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers: >>> >>>> WELL KNOWN PORT NUMBERS >>>> >>>> The Well Known Ports are assigned by the IANA and on most systems can >>>> only be used by system (or root) processes or by programs executed by >>>> privileged users. >>>> >>>> Ports are used in the TCP [RFC793] to name the ends of logical >>>> connections which carry long term conversations. For the purpose of >>>> providing services to unknown callers, a service contact port is >>>> defined. This list specifies the port used by the server process as >>>> its contact port. The contact port is sometimes called the >>>> "well-known port". >>>> >>>> To the extent possible, these same port assignments are used with the >>>> UDP [RFC768]. >>>> >>>> The range for assigned ports managed by the IANA is 0-1023. >>> >>> What does "assigned" mean here? The ports from 1023-49152 are also >>> "assigned", no? >> >> IMO that's a typo. >> >> Assigned range is 0-49151 >> >> Joe >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) >> >> iEYEARECAAYFAksZhiEACgkQE5f5cImnZrthbACcCi9lZjLTdDk7kGuCy0J9CKQA >> vM8AoL5MgfxM6/VnTCRIWVY5fJAsyE0O >> =DPw4 >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >> _______________________________________________ >> Port-srv-reg mailing list >> Port-srv-reg@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/port-srv-reg >> >
- [port-srv-reg] "assigned" Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] "assigned" Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] "assigned" Michelle Cotton
- Re: [port-srv-reg] "assigned" Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] "assigned" Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] "assigned" Michelle Cotton
- Re: [port-srv-reg] "assigned" Lars Eggert