Most odd. Your response looks good to me, but judging from the email you're responding to, they've already specifically said that reasoning is no longer considered. Perhaps you should ask which modern security protocols they're talking about and some pointers on where we might look for an "automagical upgrade" which I've never heard of before.
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd like to get some peer review on my response to IANA here. > > CouchDB is a special use-case of HTTP 1.1 as justified in my previous > application for TCP 5984. It is, however, still bound by the common > limitations of HTTP 1.1 over SSL/TLS. In theory, HTTP 1.1 provides a > mechanism to upgrade an established connection to a secure one, but in > practice this is very rarely used, or in fact, implemented. > > If you wish to use HTTP 1.1 over SSL/TLS in a way that is compatible with > current clients and libraries, it is necessary to use a dedicated port for > this. Because it is anticipated that users will want to host non-secure and > secure CouchDB databases on the same sever, we are therefor requesting a > secure port, similar to TCP 443. > > On 24 Dec 2010, at 16:51, Pearl Liang via RT wrote: > >> Dear Noah Slater: >> >> Thank you for your patience. We received the following question for you: >> >> ----- >> >> Please justify and explain why a separate port number would be needed >> for a secure version of the protocol? IANA does not anymore anticipate >> allocating separate ports for secure versions as this is no longer >> necessary with modern security protocols. Same holds for new >> versions of the protocol (a version number should be included). >> >> ----- >> >> When we receive your reply, we will continue the processing of >> the request. >> >> Thank you, >> >> Pearl Liang >> ICANN/IANA >> >> On Tue Dec 14 11:08:43 2010, pearl.liang wrote: >>> On Sat Dec 04 00:04:28 2010, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> On 3 Dec 2010, at 22:36, Pearl Liang via RT wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear Noah Slater: >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for your submission for a user port number. >>>>> >>>>> Can you please provide the current spec for the following? >>>>> >>>>>> Message Formats : >>>>>> See TCP 5984. >>>>>> >>>>>> Message Types : >>>>>> See TCP 5984. >>>>>> >>>>>> Message opcodes : >>>>>> See TCP 5984. >>>>>> >>>>>> Message Sequences : >>>>>> See TCP 5984. >>>>>> >>>>>> Protocol functions : >>>>>> See TCP 5984. >>>> >>>> Sure, CouchDB uses HTTP 1.1 as defined in RFC 2616. >>>> >>>> The rationale for why CouchDB needs a distinct port from 80 was given >>>> in the application for TCP 5984. To summarise: TCP 80 is defined as >>>> HTTP for the World Wide Web, and CouchDB is a specialised >>>> application of HTTP that is commonly expected to run in parallel >>>> with a traditional web server. This same rationale should justify >>>> the application for a TSL/SSL port variation. >>>> >>>>> The information is required to be reviewed by the current expert >>>>> review team designated by IESG. >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> >>> >>> ***ORIGINAL TEMPLATE*** >>> On Fri Dec 03 05:47:41 2010, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> Application for User Registered Port Number >>>> >>>> Name : >>>> Noah Slater >>>> >>>> E-mail : >>>> [email protected] >>>> >>>> Protocol Number : >>>> TCP >>>> >>>> Message Formats : >>>> See TCP 5984. >>>> >>>> Message Types : >>>> See TCP 5984. >>>> >>>> Message opcodes : >>>> See TCP 5984. >>>> >>>> Message Sequences : >>>> See TCP 5984. >>>> >>>> Protocol functions : >>>> See TCP 5984. >>>> >>>> Broadcast or Multicast used ? >>>> no >>>> >>>> How and what for Broadcast or Multicast is used (if used): >>>> >>>> >>>> Description : >>>> This port will be for CouchDB HTTP traffic over an SSL connection. >>>> CouchDB traffic is currently assigned to TCP 5984 by IANA. Due to >>>> Host restrictions inherent to the HTTP protocol, SSL communications >>>> need to use a different port number to differentiate them from non- >>>> SSL communications from the same network address. Compare TCP 80 >>>> and TCP 443. >>>> >>>> Name of the port : >>>> CouchDB over TLS/SSL >>>> >>>> Short name of the port : >>>> couchdbs >>>> >> >> > >
