Re: [tsvwg] [Fwd: Re: AD review: draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-05]

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

Lars Eggert wrote:

>> What has been the criteria for assigning port numbers for e.g.
>> closed protocols? (other than just registering their use)
> 
> this is going a bit offtopic, but I believe that IANA has been using
> the Expert Review procedure we're describing in iana-ports for many
> years. (One of the reasons for iana-ports is to document the existing
> procedures.)

I have not read your I-D (other than some specific parts). But I believe
that the question I asked is key to the "assigned" vs. "registered"
discussion. If it's not clear what's the criteria for assigning or
rejecting port numbers in a specific range, particularly when an app has
already been using it, I don't think one can go further than saying that
 IANA has "registered" the port.

I recall reading some piece of text at IANA's web site that for the most
part the list of registered for was kinda a "best effort" service to the
community.


>> Have there any cases in which use of a port has been rejected?
> 
> Yes.
>
>> If so, what has been that reason?
> 
> Depends :-) Maybe IANA can give some examples.
> 
>> And what has been the criteria for actually "granting" the use of
>> ports (as the above)?
> 
> Satisfying the Expert Reviewer.

Hope Michelle (or somebody else from IANA) can help with these ones.

Thanks!

Kind regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [e-mail] || [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1