Re: [port-srv-reg] Proprietary transport protocols (panoply and parabay-p2p)

Pearl Liang <pearl.liang@icann.org> Wed, 31 August 2011 21:40 UTC

Return-Path: <pearl.liang@icann.org>
X-Original-To: port-srv-reg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: port-srv-reg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04EFC21F8EEF for <port-srv-reg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 14:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d91jzymKTrL5 for <port-srv-reg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 14:40:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EXPFE100-1.exc.icann.org (expfe100-1.exc.icann.org [64.78.22.236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F0F221F8EE9 for <port-srv-reg@ietf.org>; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 14:40:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org ([64.78.22.232]) by EXPFE100-1.exc.icann.org ([64.78.22.236]) with mapi; Wed, 31 Aug 2011 14:42:27 -0700
From: Pearl Liang <pearl.liang@icann.org>
To: Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com>, "port-srv-reg@ietf.org" <port-srv-reg@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 14:43:15 -0700
Thread-Topic: [port-srv-reg] Proprietary transport protocols (panoply and parabay-p2p)
Thread-Index: AcxoJuBGP+Z3I7jATBGWfRbRkpfpeQ==
Message-ID: <CA83D0CF.217ED%pearl.liang@icann.org>
In-Reply-To: <407F3CE2-E017-4796-9369-E237F642F989@apple.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.12.0.110505
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [port-srv-reg] Proprietary transport protocols (panoply and parabay-p2p)
X-BeenThere: port-srv-reg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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/options/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, 31 Aug 2011 21:40:57 -0000

Hello Stuart,

I've updated parabay-p2p to tcp.

Question for 'panoply'.  We have both tcp and udp for panoply.  Should we
remove the udp entry?  Or we leave it for now?

Thank you,
~pearl


-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 22:28:07 -0700
To: "port-srv-reg@ietf.org" <port-srv-reg@ietf.org>
Subject: [port-srv-reg] Proprietary transport protocols (panoply and
parabay-p2p)

>The document previously said:
>
>   There are two other ways in which the previous informal temporary SRV
>   registry would be inconsistent with the current merged registry.
>   First, there were two SRV names that used proprietary transport
>   protocols (panoply and parabay-p2p).  Even for such proprietary uses,
>   SRV records are usually indexed using standard transports (typically
>   TCP or UDP); as a result, these entries are updated as follows.
>
>             +--------------------+-----------------------------+
>             | Service Name       | panoply                     |
>             | Transport Protocol | UDP                         |
>             +--------------------+-----------------------------+
>             | Service Name       | parabay-p2p                 |
>             | Transport Protocol | UDP                         |
>             +--------------------+-----------------------------+
>
>I have checked the email records, and it appears these names were
>accidentally recorded incorrectly. Both actually use TCP:
>
>Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Vishnu Varadaraj <vishnuv@gmail.com>
>> Date: 25 January 2010 18:55:33 PST
>> To: srv_type_request@dns-sd.org
>> Subject: Addition of protocol : parabay-p2p
>> 
>> Please register the following protocol:
>> 
>> Short name: parabay-p2p
>> Descriptive name: Parabay P2P protocol.
>> Name: Vishnu Varadaraj
>> Email: vishnuv@parabay.com
>> Protocol is proprietary.
>> Primary Transport Protocol: _tcp
>> Defined TXT keys: None
>
>Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: natarajan balasundara <nbalasundara@gmail.com>
>> Date: 19 April 2010 15:02:16 PDT
>> To: srv_type_request@dns-sd.org
>> Subject: Addition of protocol: panoply
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I would like to add a protocol 'panoply'.
>> 
>> Here are the details:
>> 
>> ---
>> 1. Short name of protocol: panoply
>> 2. Descriptive name of protocol: Panoply multimedia composite transfer
>>protocol
>> 3. Name and email address of responsible person: rajan@ipanoramii.com
>> 4. Primary transport protocol: _tcp
>> 5. List of defined TXT record keys: none
>> --
>> 
>> Thank you very much,
>> 
>> Natarajan Balasundara
>> (rajan@ipanoramii.com)
>
>Michelle, can you update the new registry accordingly? Thanks.
>
>Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com>
>* Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Inc.
>* www.stuartcheshire.org
>
>_______________________________________________
>Port-srv-reg mailing list
>Port-srv-reg@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/port-srv-reg