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

Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com> Wed, 20 January 2010 15:18 UTC

Return-Path: <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: yam@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yam@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6D6C3A6961 for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 07:18:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.576
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.576 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.023, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 aUNOJtOPPADG for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 07:18:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mgw-mx09.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [192.100.105.134]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F27883A6855 for <yam@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 07:18:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh105.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.211]) by mgw-mx09.nokia.com (Switch-3.3.3/Switch-3.3.3) with ESMTP id o0KFHisR006669; Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:18:21 -0600
Received: from esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.183]) by esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:16:33 +0200
Received: from mgw-sa01.ext.nokia.com ([147.243.1.47]) by esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:16:32 +0200
Received: from mail.fit.nokia.com (esdhcp030222.research.nokia.com [172.21.30.222]) by mgw-sa01.ext.nokia.com (Switch-3.3.3/Switch-3.3.3) with ESMTP id o0KFGUjf025469 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:16:31 +0200
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.3 at fit.nokia.com
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=Apple-Mail-9-78059104; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1
From: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B571D48.1090408@isi.edu>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:16:24 +0200
Message-Id: <1FED6655-A8D1-4476-BBA7-E1BC2C168D76@nokia.com>
References: <201001192042.VAA24070@TR-Sys.de> <01NINCMHCJIW004042@mauve.mrochek.com> <4B56C4D8.3090103@gulbrandsen.priv.no> <BB76B773-67C8-416E-871A-358D1CEAE529@nokia.com> <4B571D48.1090408@isi.edu>
To: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077)
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (mail.fit.nokia.com [0.0.0.0]); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:16:24 +0200 (EET)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Jan 2010 15:16:32.0917 (UTC) FILETIME=[8C9C7450:01CA99E3]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 07:26:31 -0800
Cc: Michelle Cotton <michelle.cotton@icann.org>, yam@ietf.org, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: [yam] draft-daboo-srv-email: POP3S/IMAPS?
X-BeenThere: yam@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Yet Another Mail working group discussion list <yam.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam>
List-Post: <mailto:yam@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:18:53 -0000

On 2010-1-20, at 17:12, Joe Touch wrote:
> Lars Eggert wrote:
> ...
>>> My suggestion would be to add a section to that draft grandfathering 
>>> ports 465, 993, 2000 and a few more (adding as much negative verbiage as 
>>> seems wise; I don't think the exact amount makes any difference at all). 
>>> IIRC port 2000 can be grandfathered a half-dozen times.

Just to be clear - it wasn't me who wrote what you're quoting...

Lars


> 
> There are two separate issues:
> 
> - - previous assignments that don't follow the proposed recommendations
> 	- as noted, there's no goal to fix that
> 
> - - 'squatting', or use of ports without registering through IANA
> 	- IMO, these should not be ignored, but clearly cannot be
> 	treated as equivalent to 'self assigned'
> 
> 	i.e., IMO, IANA should list these as "unauthorized use",
> 	as a service to the community to help those using those
> 	ports as assigned.
> 
> I would expect the draft might address both issues.
> 
> Joe
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAktXHUgACgkQE5f5cImnZrur0wCgrEKpARNefyRROwqpZSLeS39H
> JlYAoPcevBtqqK0fW4kmR41xVKPqATm8
> =VHin
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----