Re: [port-srv-reg] we need to make progress

[Stuart Cheshire <[e-mail]>]

On 3 Sep, 2010, at 10:07, Joe Touch wrote:

>>       <t>For each service name, there may exist zero or more  
>> associated port
>>       number assignments. A port number assignment associated with  
>> a service
>>       name contains the transport protocol, port number and  
>> possibly additional
>>       data, such as a DCCP Service Code.</t>
>>
>> This implies that a given service name can have *different* port
>> numbers assigned for different transport protocols.
>
> That is correct, and always has been.
>
>> If we really want that then a lot of the rest of the document will
>> have to change too. I propose we just delete it.
>
> Not sure it needs to be called out specifically. OK to delete, but  
> with
> the understanding that we're already allowed to do this and it  
> shouldn't
> affect anything.

Okay, deleted.

Stuart Cheshire <[e-mail]>
* Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Inc.
* www.stuartcheshire.org