IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 20 May 2021 17:43 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
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 31E753A200D for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 May 2021 10:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eZeaxXK2z0CX for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 May 2021 10:43:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52f.google.com (mail-pg1-x52f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D94BD3A200C for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 May 2021 10:43:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52f.google.com with SMTP id f22so11429001pgb.9 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 May 2021 10:43:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=ruxeaiiNw27hNtAP3g239wgawT0iAvIhFLp+jEWP1RE=; b=odjiiYYsbkncSLYgDuaOIVphypnkO8+Hqkc4EKqYE/1aQXfA7vp3TQmcQB+dGViG5q vmmviHHJeQFLfyzbGjMUOg7w3p7V5fJna3/Yznavr1GMeDl6U2ZzfVlLGLGSk4QqZ8Jf VpAVEqCPkGbxFriek1K2s93GagGkNyxsbky38E4w3ePiFioJJooAfTfACNogpIzG6E7/ iFs3c15MrjaKGdHgGYy1zeugwE+eIwENJqk5a0NctDh3gYNpHd3WCSH8X4fQYf/pZ9pW ks3tCeH2XwlMCwWqxa1+S4VJnDiDOlNxeZA+Ibxu1e+IEJlEaK+sBHgOjVYspcYDukUQ jPSQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=ruxeaiiNw27hNtAP3g239wgawT0iAvIhFLp+jEWP1RE=; b=TOTsHGTKogVhN+Lf9eA36/joq2uGVtLuSiAybqodYyZNSTnTXm8QuZi54TvqoeDYFo Rl8qXnOmFY1njM2QUz6vpWL8nb/Sb9sbomXkuF0uTfRCi1hXjB7F3QSyOW9k4vs5e1AY fWn6LlwCt2Bm7wZvUI6y6Fo6u5SK3T8XQgyfkMYPkB0rqw50o0rlucnIpKrl5rL2WTKk xipVIjRDl7ujQWtX+36KtUpzsj+OLZYWPxJXItNjotFo+w5W6bgImT9QeZRnjbKBFjN3 Ittg+PUtRCqbgmvJemu+gRNwYI2bE4TXqU/2z1dkhLhpVJWsT+ujPQi2A0Os99AedsPQ tcvA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Z6Z42utieWrOq/+yeQp29hLjIozLefHcGAVYQVm1OmTDbA4gk /1EfqWNilTQFK76Tn1SnUc4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwDVZ2Uyd84fslzhhRgi6D0aN7ApKpTjbDjyOWWUaoHj4rjgEa06nv53TZZIBoVBOYxaLOQQA==
X-Received: by 2002:a65:6849:: with SMTP id q9mr5581248pgt.377.1621532631540; Thu, 20 May 2021 10:43:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2600:8802:5b00:bc1::1014]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u23sm2331110pfn.106.2021.05.20.10.43.50 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 20 May 2021 10:43:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <97D6795B-6654-4E88-AD69-5D06DF2FE5F7@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_094B1950-127A-4B5D-822F-26188DDCDCDA"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.100.0.2.22\))
Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 10:43:48 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CAM4esxRcxJ7HZSG2gk75+sA1PRWjkQqQT0F7+1EsG8gLOy__yA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: iana-port-experts@icann.org, tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>
To: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
References: <CAM4esxRcxJ7HZSG2gk75+sA1PRWjkQqQT0F7+1EsG8gLOy__yA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.100.0.2.22)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/QgWB9SJLL4DCvhPPPDYDq1x13V4>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] 3GPP Liaison Statement clarifying port requests
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 20 May 2021 17:43:58 -0000

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 <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> 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
> 
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email