Re: [yam] draft-daboo-srv-email: POP3S/IMAPS?

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

Alfred � wrote:

>Please note that the Transport Area is in the process to update
>the Port Numbers IANA registry -- see:
>  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-04>
>
>In pursuit of long-standing IESG recommendations, the new unified
>Service Names and Port Numbers registry will no longer allow
>multiple port numbers to be registered for a single conceptual
>service (and different service names for variants of a service),
>and it intends to start applying the new policy on legacy registry
>content during the planned (annual?) "garbage collection" phases
>that IANA will conduct in the future.
>So unless a specific use case can be shown to be supported by a very
>strong momentum, the registry garbage collection phases will perhaps
>some day start challenging the service name registrations and default
>port assignments for 'imaps' and similar "services over TLS" that do
>not use in-band security negotiation on the same port number as the
>basic service and hence do not conform to the new registry rules for
>service names and default port number assignment.
>
Alfred,
While I agree that imaps/pops wouldn't have been registered according to 
new rules, they represent widely deployed variants of IMAP/POP3, so I 
don't think IANA can just remove them from the registry.