Re: Reminder: WGLC Announcement for draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-08 - 26th November 2010

Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com> Wed, 01 December 2010 11:05 UTC

Return-Path: <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 374C53A6B41 for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 03:05:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.553
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.553 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.046, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MMryH0rJY3qg for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 03:05:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.128.26]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C9E13A6B40 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Dec 2010 03:05:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.fit.nokia.com (esdhcp030222.research.nokia.com [172.21.30.222]) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id oB1B606L018679 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 1 Dec 2010 13:06:01 +0200
Subject: Re: Reminder: WGLC Announcement for draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-08 - 26th November 2010
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96.4 at fit.nokia.com
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=Apple-Mail-29--638260672; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1
From: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <4CF6252A.2020303@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 13:05:51 +0200
Message-Id: <BB803922-E3CD-4B26-9467-8BB14B259D3F@nokia.com>
References: <4CE573AC.6050708@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <p06240827c9108fb7d7f0@[10.20.30.150]> <4CED3A82.5050708@ericsson.com> <p0624089fc912ec9557a7@[10.20.30.150]> <4CF60F04.60101@ericsson.com> <4CF6252A.2020303@cisco.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082)
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6 (mail.fit.nokia.com); Wed, 01 Dec 2010 13:05:57 +0200 (EET)
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Cc: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, tsvwg WG <tsvwg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 11:05:34 -0000

Hi,

On 2010-12-1, at 12:36, Eliot Lear wrote:
> As I recall, though, nobody really had a problem with dropping the
> distinction.  It's only there in some UNIX flavors; and the only real
> issue is on multi-user systems where the port could conceivably be
> grabbed by someone.  Realistically, that's not a concern because if it's
> important, there is something listening from start-up.

"only some Unix flavors" is severely understating the issue. I just tried MacOS, FreeBSD and Ubuntu Linux, and none of them let user process bind to ports below 1024.

I agree with you that the reasons for having separate port ranges are bogus, but the *reality* is that it *matters* whether your port is above or below 1024 on many deployed systems. And hence it matters for applicants what number they get.

Lars