1. Are well known ports archaic? If so, can we request that the
IANA
do away with the distinction?
I don't know whether I would use the word "archaic", but the distinction
between < 1024 and >= 1024 is certainly Unix-specific. In the Windows
operating systems, the port range 1-1023 is not special. Some Windows OS
services use low port numbers, but not all. UPNP, for example, uses
ports 1900 and 2500; the RPC applications use dynamic port numbers.
2. If they are not archaic, under what circumstances should they be
allocated?
I have no problem with the current system.
-- Christian Huitema
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf