On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 7:02 PM John Gilmore <[email protected]> wrote: > Protocol 114 was unassigned in RFC 1700 in Oct 1994, which was the last > RFC tabulating protocol assignments. In January 2002, RFCs ceased being > published for protocol number assignments, according to RFC 3232. > Sometime before Feb 1999, protocol 114 was assigned here: > > > https://web.archive.org/web/19990203044112/http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/protocol-numbers > >
I looked at this document. It looks like many listed there are no longer used/exist. Maybe deprecating them and thereby making the numbers available for assignment seem like something IETF/IESG can do? Behcet > The original IANA, Jon Postel, died on October 16, 1998. There was some > turmoil in the relevant websites at the time. The Internet Archive's > Wayback Machine does not appear to have captured the IANA.org or isi.edu > websites during an earlier time when this protocol number was not > assigned. But, only five assignments in Feb 1999 had followed 114; the > next one was L2TP (protocol 115) by Bernard Aboba (April 1998). The > preceding one was PGM (protocol 113) by Tony Speakman in January 1998. > So it's a pretty good bet that it was assigned by Postel between January > and April 1998. > > (L2TP was documented in RFC 2661 of August 1999, and by that point it was > not using protocol #115; it ran over IP and UDP on port 1701. A later > 2005 evolution of L2TP, L2TPv3, used protocol 115.) > > Does anyone have archives of the TCP-IP Distribution List from 1998? > The only copy I have found so far is at > http://securitydigest.org/tcp-ip/ but it ends in 1994 (with no apparent > "we're closing down the list" messages). > > A separate issue: > > Having read the draft-zhu-intarea-gma-03.txt, and skimmed the 2017 > draft-kanugovi-intarea-mams-protocol-03 that it references, I don't see > how this protocol could in any way be seen as a 0-hop protocol. The > whole design is to provide multiple paths to the Internet, which would > require that the relevant packets traverse routers. The MAMS draft > explicitly says "MAMS routes user plane data packets at the IP layer". > 0-hop protocols only operate on a single LAN and cannot be routed, by > definition. (ARP, DHCP or its predecessor BOOTP are examples of 0-hop > protocols.) > > Therefore, I think this draft should not be using protocol 114. > > John > > > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area >
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
