Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (port) names
Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Wed, 03 June 2009 15:26 UTC
Return-Path: <touch@ISI.EDU>
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 1D6223A6847 for <port-srv-reg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 08:26:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 md1hrtjhjrFV for <port-srv-reg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 08:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB8ED3A6F86 for <port-srv-reg@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 08:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.46] (pool-71-106-86-44.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net [71.106.86.44]) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n53FOm6E014762; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 08:24:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4A2695C0.4020407@isi.edu>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 08:24:48 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
References: <E4210C71-440F-453D-916E-BE39EE3F995E@apple.com> <4A0DA870.1030100@isi.edu> <4A1A9BDC.9000608@ericsson.com> <F118FEC4-8FCD-484D-B883-92C30F5366B2@apple.com> <200905292107.n4TL708C018705@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <1E0EF9D8-2BE4-45A0-8E97-AEE36E165A35@apple.com> <200906011220.n51CKiOd016264@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <4A23F5D7.50302@isi.edu> <200906012017.n51KHWYw022003@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <4A244549.2080107@isi.edu> <4A253CA9.5030800@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A253CA9.5030800@ericsson.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>, port-srv-reg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (port) names
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: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 15:26:15 -0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Magnus Westerlund wrote: > Hi, > > I am actually getting a bit confused by this whole debate. Are the port > registries "keyword" used in the getservname? There are different registries: IANA's TCP/UDP number registry Stuart's name-only registry (SRV service types, rfc2782) IANA's SCTP registry IANA's DCCP registry Currently, all three have different rules for names: IANA legacy - 15 chars, start a-z0-9, interior/end .+*/_-, use cases IANA new names - as specified on the application - 14 characters (no other rules) as reviewed - 14 chars, start a-z0-9, interior -, no case DNS SRV service types - 14 chars, start/end a-z0-9, include -, no case SCTP names - (no length specified) a-z0-9 .+*/_-, use cases DCCP names - (no length specified) a-z0-9 .+*/_-, use cases > What other usages are > there real for the "keyword"? TCPMUX defines their use. My TCP portnames draft did too (expired, but still bumping around). Neither one is particularly sensitive to the characters used. > We are trying to merge three different registries because there usage > seems to have gotten entangled. Are there other ways we could untangle > them? SCTP and DCCP did NOT subsume existing IANA TCP/UDP names, though they could easily have done so. SRV names claim to subsume existing IANA ports when created, but many are not listed. New IANA assignments are required to register with the SRV service type registry separately. We could redefine the names to use the IANA legacy rules, which are a superset of all the rules. The key question at that point is whether this breaks anything - presumably only DNS SRV use would be an issue, since everything else either uses primarily the numbers IANA assigns rather than the names, or uses the name as an opaque string (getsrvbyname, TCPMUX, TCP portnames). Joe -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkomlcAACgkQE5f5cImnZrt/4ACbBzt6lZk8Lh3XTXm1CqjOtehi ZrgAoJVbiekvFgiR+OKPj4ruP8F9BYXC =71R5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (port) n… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Thomas Narten
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Thomas Narten
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Thomas Narten
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Thomas Narten
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Thomas Narten
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Thomas Narten
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Stuart Cheshire
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Thomas Narten
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Lars Eggert
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Joe Touch
- Re: [port-srv-reg] Survey of current service (por… Magnus Westerlund