[tsvwg] Re : 3GPP Liaison Statement clarifying port requests

[[e-mail]]

Hi,

To Fred:

When a port is requested by 3GPP, the solution requiring the new port is described in a 3GPP normative specification, document accepted by the IANA policy. Obviously, if the proposed solution is of general interest for Internet, an RFC publication will be requested.
And it is clear that it is not requested to be able to bypass the IANA policy regarding port number allocation nor to be automatic blessing for any request (as indicated in the liaison). I admit that it was not so clear in the past for some 3GPP folks.

To Martin:

The current proposed answer is fine for me. It is the level of feedback requested by 3GPP.

I don't know when the final version will be available but it would be great if an official LS reply could be received on Tuesday next week at the latest. The 3GPP CT4 working group is currently in virtual meeting.

Regards,

Lionel


-------- Message original --------
De : Joseph Touch <[e-mail]>
Date : jeu. 20 mai 2021 à 20:11
À : Fred Baker <[e-mail]>
Cc : [e-mail], tsvwg <[e-mail]>
Objet : Re: [tsvwg] 3GPP Liaison Statement clarifying port requests
Hi, Fred,

Although any sort of description is useful, we don’t require drafts for port assignments.

They used to be required for system ports (actually, they need to be standards-track), but we deprecate assigning those ports anyway now.

Joe

> On May 20, 2021, at 10:43 AM, Fred Baker <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> From my perspective, 3GPP is forever and always empowered to ask, as is anyone else. However, there is no mandate requiring IANA to respond positively to the request. I would hope that they would file an internet draft proposing the new port assignment and arguing for it.
>
>> On May 18, 2021, at 10:48 AM, Martin Duke <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Hello TSVWG and port experts,
>>
>> We got this 3GPP Liaison Statement last month:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1726/
>>
>> The key paragraphs are:
>> 3GPP understands that it could be possible to assign to 3GPP a port per
>> transport protocol (UDP, TCP, SCTP, DCCP) that will be used for service port
>> negotiation/discovery for all the future internal interfaces defined by 3GPP,
>> avoiding the need for a systematic IANA port assignment for interfaces used
>> only inside the 3GPP system...
>>
>>
>> ...it is also the 3GPP understanding that this statement cannot
>> prohibit 3GPP to request in the future a port assignment for a new service
>> application for which none of the port assignment alternatives would be
>> applicable.
>>
>>
>> They would like confirmation, IIUC, that they are not cut off from any further port assignments.
>> Any feedback on what I should tell them in response?
>> Your friendly AD,
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>
>


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.