Hi, Christopher (et al.), On 9/26/2011 6:44 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Joe Touch<[email protected]> wrote:
...
The doc in question hit version 16 on 8/13/2011... I think the authors feel that the problems/issues/discussion-points here are addressed in this version. Are we cycled down to acceptance of the language or no? The -16 version asks for a 'well-known' port, which gets to the main point of this discussion I think.
I would expect that it would NOT be a 'well-known' port, but a 'registered' port, given that security is optional.
If security is required - just in a variety of forms - then I would expect that the text would need to be reworded.
(and an IANA request would still need to be made when the doc goes toward publishing)
That happens automatically as part of the processing of the IANA Considerations section, FWIW.
Joe _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
