Dominic Mitchell wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 1999 at 09:04:20AM +0100, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> > A question that always baffled me (I'm fairly easy to baffle) is why we've
> > got some numbers defined as both udp and tcp when the service type is only
> > one or the other. Does anyone know?
>
> Probably because the IANA specifies them that way. I think that they
> try to keep both UDP and TCP ports the same, "just in case". There
> might be a better explanation in rfc1700 (assigned numbers)
Nope, that is the official reason. Cheesy-poofs for you. :)
Doug
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services Matthew Dillon
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services Josef Karthauser
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services Sheldon Hearn
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services Dominic Mitchell
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/services Doug
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/servic... Josef Karthauser
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/se... Doug
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/se... Ben Rosengart
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/se... Doug
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/se... Ben Rosengart
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/se... Sheldon Hearn
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/se... John-Mark Gurney
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/se... Dag-Erling Smorgrav
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/se... Sheldon Hearn
- Re: Mentioning RFC numbers in /etc/se... Dag-Erling Smorgrav

