Re: draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-09: How we have resolved WG last call comments

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Magnus,

On 12/2/10 1:42 PM, Magnus Westerlund wrote:
> 1. Proposal to make the system port range equal to the registered range.
>
> Outcome: No clear consensus on making the change. There was some support
> for this change. But also push back on doing the change. The push back
> can be summarized as: Agreement that in theory there should be no
> differences, however in reality there are a number of implementations,
> mostly UNIX dialects that do make a difference. 

This is a distinction without a difference.  Nobody cares anymore about
the port range, and the argument is circular, if it was every really
stable to begin with.  This distinction was made at a time when perhaps
the only port in use over 100 (not 1000) was RIP, with the assumption
being that services would be registered.  That flew out the window
largely with X, and then out of the planet with Windows, and out of the
solar system with mobile devices.  Please.  Let's move this distinction
into history, where it belongs.

Eliot