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

Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com> Sat, 27 August 2011 05:26 UTC

Return-Path: <cheshire@apple.com>
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 BC9A921F8A55 for <port-srv-reg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 22:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.532
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 L0O3VFCsHy5f for <port-srv-reg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 22:26:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-out.apple.com (honeycrisp.apple.com [17.151.62.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3E4521F8A4E for <port-srv-reg@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 22:26:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Received: from relay14.apple.com ([17.128.113.52]) by mail-out.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Exchange Server 7u4-20.01 64bit (built Nov 21 2010)) with ESMTPS id <0LQK00CNGN6WNJ52@mail-out.apple.com> for port-srv-reg@ietf.org; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 22:28:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 11807134-b7c71ae0000014d0-96-4e587eb4170d
Received: from kencur (kencur.apple.com [17.151.62.38]) (using TLS with cipher RC4-MD5 (RC4-MD5/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by relay14.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id 04.CD.05328.4BE785E4; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 22:20:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [17.153.18.30] (unknown [17.153.18.30]) by kencur.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Exchange Server 7u4-20.01 64bit (built Nov 21 2010)) with ESMTPSA id <0LQK00N9NN6V35B0@kencur.apple.com> for port-srv-reg@ietf.org; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 22:28:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 22:28:07 -0700
Message-id: <407F3CE2-E017-4796-9369-E237F642F989@apple.com>
To: port-srv-reg@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrPJMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiON1OTXdLXYSfwcknehZd34QcGD2WLPnJ FMAYxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJWx/8tt5oLtQhV3Zl5hbmB8ydvFyMkhIWAicXv6UjYIW0ziwr31 QDYXh5BAO5NEy/MX7CAJXgFBiR+T77F0MXJwMAvISxw8LwsSZhbQkvj+qJUFon42k8S6y23M IAk2oMSLz1fAhgoLOEl8fr8ZbA6LgKrEorUHmSFm2khcWX4BLC4iICnx4+0PsPkSArISTcsy JjDyzkKyeRbC5llINi9gZF7FKFiUmpNYaWiil1hQkJOql5yfu4kRFCwNhSY7GA/+5D/EKMDB qMTD6+Eb4SfEmlhWXJl7iFGCg1lJhDcjByjEm5JYWZValB9fVJqTWnyIUZqDRUmc9//VID8h gfTEktTs1NSC1CKYLBMHp1QD48p9kp+PmDVsdPt85B/z/y7tponu859GiQUphJyurhUJuX/p bHXPQq4tT26+eaxzJe/Y+6yF+x4WTOL+/vfFRe2N+6MbHj23ylKe2cDNxv+j71v+D56tGXvZ ZnSuY1h368FSW0F5ZYnsg0XdXhO0Hx75pvrEWK8ytvbSZyf5qSxJf97zqBWsC1RiKc5INNRi LipOBAATv5ttEgIAAA==
Subject: [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: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 05:26:51 -0000

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