IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Assigning ports

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Fri, 16 September 2011 18:08 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97B3821F8BD8 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 11:08:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.911, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_15=0.6, 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 vbUcRwokvhaY for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 11:08:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from darkstar.isi.edu (darkstar.isi.edu [128.9.128.127]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17F3C21F8BC3 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 11:08:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [128.9.160.166] (abc.isi.edu [128.9.160.166]) (authenticated bits=0) by darkstar.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p8GIAbHN025040 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 16 Sep 2011 11:10:37 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4E73911D.3050507@isi.edu>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 11:10:37 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>
Subject: Re: Assigning ports
References: <4CF79432.8070508@ericsson.com><008501cb92fa$dc1c1ba0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net><7B685540-D448-43D1-98D9-5CCBD4A98692@nokia.com><00de01cc7381$1059d580$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <4E7270D0.5070609@isi.edu> <014c01cc7455$16fca500$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
In-Reply-To: <014c01cc7455$16fca500$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 18:08:51 -0000

Hi, Tom,

On 9/16/2011 2:43 AM, t.petch wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joe Touch"<touch@isi.edu>
> To: "t.petch"<daedulus@btconnect.com>
> Cc: "Magnus Westerlund"<magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>; "tsvwg"
> <tsvwg@ietf.org>; "Lars Eggert"<lars.eggert@nokia.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:40 PM
>
>
>> Hi, Tom,
>>
>> On 9/15/2011 1:25 AM, t.petch wrote:
>>> Now that RFC6335 has been published, the IANA page on how to get a port
> assigned
>>> has been updated (take a good book if you want to access it:-( but the text
>>> there leaves me confused.
>>>
>>> It says
>>> "System Ports are assigned by IETF process for standards-track protocols, as
> per
>>> [RFC1340]"
>>> which, RFC1340 being ' Assigned Numbers. J. Reynolds, J. Postel. July 1992'
>>> confuses me.
>>
>> It's a reference to the original definition of System Ports.
>>
>>> Should this instead refer to RFC6335 or RFC5226? (I suspect that
>>> the former is the better reference even if to make sense of it you must
> access
>>> the latter).
>>
>> It might be useful to cite all three.
>
> Joe
>
> I think it would be wrong to have any mention of RFC1340.  Its description of
> ports and their allocation procedures is plain wrong and would mislead.

That RFC defines the user/system ports.

Yes, though, just RFc 6335 might be sufficient all around... it cites 
these others as needed.

Joe

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status