Reassignment of System Ports to the IESG
draft-kuehlewind-system-ports-05
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (individual) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Mirja Kühlewind , Sabrina Tanamal | ||
| Last updated | 2020-03-25 (latest revision 2020-02-10) | ||
| Stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Intended RFC status | Proposed Standard | ||
| Formats | plain text xml pdf htmlized bibtex | ||
| Reviews | |||
| Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
| Document shepherd | No shepherd assigned | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Waiting for Writeup::Revised I-D Needed | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus Boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | |||
| Responsible AD | Martin Duke | ||
| Send notices to | (None) | ||
| IANA | IANA review state | IANA OK - Actions Needed | |
Network Working Group M. Kuehlewind, Ed.
Internet-Draft Ericsson GmbH
Intended status: Standards Track S. Tanamal
Expires: August 13, 2020 February 10, 2020
Reassignment of System Ports to the IESG
draft-kuehlewind-system-ports-05
Abstract
In the IANA Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number Registry,
a large number of System Ports are currently assigned to individuals
or companies who have registered the port for the use with a certain
protocol before RFC6335 was published. For some of these ports, RFCs
exist that describe the respective protocol; for others, RFCs are
under development that define, re-define, or assign the protocol used
for the respective port, such as in case of so-far unused UDP ports
that have been registered together with the respective TCP port. In
these cases the IESG has the change control about the protocol used
on the port (as described in the corresponding RFC) but change
control for the port allocation iis designated to others. Under
existing operational procedures, this means the original assignee
needs to be involved in chnage to the port assignment. As it is not
always possible to get in touch with the original assignee,
particularly because of out-dated contact information, this current
practice of handling historical allocation of System Ports does not
scale well on a case-by-case basis. To address this, this document
instructs IANA to perform actions with the goal to reassign System
Ports to the IESG that were assigned to individuals prior to the
publication of RFC6335, where appropriate.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 13, 2020.
Kuehlewind & Tanamal Expires August 13, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Reassignment of System Ports February 2020
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
1. Introduction
RFC 6335 [RFC6335] requires System Ports, also known as the Well
Known Ports, in the range from 0 to 1023, to be assigned by the "IETF
Review" or "IESG Approval" procedures [RFC8126]. For assignments
done through RFCs published via the "IETF Document Stream" [RFC4844],
the Assignee will be the IESG with the IETF Chair as the Contact.
However, ports that were assigned before the publication of RFC 6335,
are often assigned to individuals, even if they are part of the
System Port range and have a corresponding RFC. Besides the fact
that System Ports are widely used by IETF protocols where the
protocol specification is under IETF change control as defined in an
RFC but the port itself may not, this situation is especially
problematic if the assignment gets or needs to be changed. The
Assignee can change the assignment without confirmation of the IETF.
However, if the IETF process requires a change, including de-
assignment, this cannot be done without the agreement of the original
Assignee. Furthermore, no procedure is defined to change the
assignment in cases where the original Assignee is not reachable or
not available anymore.
This document mainly aims to clarify the change control for protocols
that are maintained by the IETF; it further also intends an update of
currently unused or not maintained ports. For this purpose this
document instructs IANA to perform accumulative actions with the goal
to re-assign currently assigned System Ports in the range from 0 to
1023 to the IESG, where appropriate, which will also help to align
existing entries in the "Service Name and Transport Protocol Port
Number Registry" with the current procedures defined in RFC 6335.
Kuehlewind & Tanamal Expires August 13, 2020 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Reassignment of System Ports February 2020
2. IANA Considerations
IANA [will perform/has performed] actions with the goal to re-assign
System Ports in the port range from 0 to 1023 that are currently
assigned in the "Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number
Registry" (https://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-
numbers/service-names-port-numbers.xhtml) to clarify the IESG's
responisibility in managing those allocations. When the re-
assignment is performd, the contact data for these assignments should
be adjusted to refelct the IESG <iesg@ietf.org> as assignee and the
IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org> as point of contact. The original
assignee and respective contact information should be preserved as a
note against the revised assignment data.
To perform the re-assignment, IANA is requested to contact the
current Assignees by email with the registered email address to
request the transfer. If the provided email address is not valid
anymore, IANA is requested to report this to the IESG, and the IESG
is requested to perform actions, such as sending requests to the
ietf@ietf.org mailing list to determine updated contact information.
If these actions do not show success within 4 weeks, the IESG is
requested to make a decision about the re-assignment of the port in
question.
If the current assignee does not agree to the re-assignment or does
not reply within four weeks, IANA is requested to inform the IESG
which then is requested to make a decision about the re-assignment of
the port in question.
Before the start of this re-assignment process, IANA [will also
update/has further updated] the Reference column with the following
reference for the listed ports that have a corresponding published
RFC that uses this port number, as well as the Assignment Notes
column for historic RFCs:
+-----------+----------+--------------+-------------+---------------+
| Service | Port | Transport | Reference | Assignment |
| Name | Number | protocol | | Notes |
+-----------+----------+--------------+-------------+---------------+
| systat | 11 | tcp | RFC866 | |
| systat | 11 | udp | RFC866 | |
| qotd | 17 | tcp | RFC865 | |
| qotd | 17 | upd | RFC865 | |
| msp | 18 | tcp | RFC1312 | |
| msp | 18 | udp | RFC1312 | |
| chargen | 19 | tcp | RFC864 | |
| chargen | 19 | udp | RFC864 | |
| smtp | 25 | tcp | RFC5321 | |
Kuehlewind & Tanamal Expires August 13, 2020 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Reassignment of System Ports February 2020
| smtp | 25 | udp | RFC5321 | |
| time | 37 | tcp | RFC868 | |
| time | 37 | udp | RFC868 | |
| rap | 38 | tcp | RFC1476 | |
| rap | 38 | udp | RFC1476 | |
| rlp | 39 | tcp | RFC887 | |
| rlp | 39 | udp | RFC887 | |
| nicname | 43 | tcp | RFC3912 | |
| nicname | 43 | udp | RFC3912 | |
| tacacs | 49 | tcp | RFC1492 | |
| tacacs | 49 | udp | RFC1492 | |
| domain | 53 | tcp | RFC1035 | |
| domain | 53 | udp | RFC1035 | |
| whoispp | 63 | tcp | RFC1913 | |
| whoispp | 63 | udp | RFC1913 | |
| bootps | 67 | tcp | RFC2131 | |
| bootps | 67 | udp | RFC2131 | |
| bootpc | 68 | tcp | RFC2131 | |
| bootpc | 68 | udp | RFC2131 | |
| tftp | 69 | tcp | RFC1350 | |
| tftp | 69 | udp | RFC1350 | |
| gopher | 70 | tcp | RFC1436 | |
| gopher | 70 | udp | RFC1436 | |
| finger | 79 | tcp | RFC1288 | |
| finger | 79 | udp | RFC1288 | |
| www-http | 80 | tcp | RFC7230, | |
| | | | RFC7540 | |
| www-http | 80 | udp | RFC7230, | |
| | | | RFC7540 | |
| kerberos | 88 | tcp | RFC4120 | |
| kerberos | 88 | udp | RFC4120 | |
| dixie | 96 | tcp | RFC1249 | |
| dixie | 96 | udp | RFC1249 | |
| hostname | 101 | tcp | RFC953 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| hostname | 101 | udp | RFC953 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| cso | 105 | tcp | RFC2378 | |
| cso | 105 | udp | RFC2378 | |
| rtelnet | 107 | tcp | RFC818 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| rtelnet | 107 | udp | RFC818 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| pop2 | 109 | tcp | RFC937 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| pop2 | 109 | udp | RFC937 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| pop3 | 110 | tcp | RFC1939 | |
Kuehlewind & Tanamal Expires August 13, 2020 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Reassignment of System Ports February 2020
| pop3 | 110 | udp | | |
| sunrpc | 111 | tcp | RFC1833 | |
| sunrpc | 111 | udp | RFC1833 | |
| auth | 113 | tcp | RFC1413 | |
| auth | 113 | udp | RFC1413 | |
| sftp | 115 | tcp | RFC913 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| sftp | 115 | udp | RFC913 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| cfdptkt | 120 | tcp | RFC1235 | |
| cfdptkt | 120 | udp | RFC1235 | |
| pwdgen | 129 | tcp | RFC972 | |
| pwdgen | 129 | udp | RFC972 | |
| bftp | 152 | tcp | RFC1068 | |
| bftp | 152 | udp | RFC1068 | |
| sgmp | 153 | tcp | RFC1028 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| sgmp | 153 | udp | RFC1028 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| snmp | 161 | tcp | RFC3430 | |
| snmp | 161 | udp | RFC3417 | |
| snmptrap | 162 | tcp | RFC3430 | |
| snmptrap | 162 | udp | RFC3417 | |
| bgp | 179 | tcp | RFC4271 | |
| bgp | 179 | udp | RFC4271 | |
| irc | 194 | tcp | RFC1459 | |
| irc | 194 | udp | RFC1459 | |
| smux | 199 | tcp | RFC1227 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| smux | 199 | udp | RFC1227 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| ipx | 213 | tcp | RFC1234 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| ipx | 213 | upd | RFC1234 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| mpp | 218 | tcp | RFC1204 | |
| mpp | 218 | udp | RFC1204 | |
| bgmp | 264 | tcp | RFC3913 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| bgmp | 264 | udp | RFC3913 | This RFC is |
| | | | | historic. |
| pt-tls | 271 | tcp | RFC6876 | |
| pt-tls | 271 | udp | RFC6876 | |
| rtsps | 322 | tcp | RFC7826 | |
| rtsps | 322 | udp | RFC7826 | |
| odmr | 366 | tcp | RFC2645 | |
| odmr | 366 | udp | RFC2645 | |
| aurp | 387 | tcp | RFC1504 | |
Kuehlewind & Tanamal Expires August 13, 2020 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Reassignment of System Ports February 2020
| aurp | 387 | udp | RFC1504 | |
| ldap | 389 | tcp | RFC4516 | |
| ldap | 389 | udp | RFC4516 | |
| svrloc | 427 | tcp | RFC2608 | |
| svrloc | 427 | udp | RFC2608 | |
| https | 443 | tcp | RFC7230, | |
| | | | RFC7540 | |
| https | 443 | udp | RFC7230, | |
| | | | RFC7540 | |
| kpasswd | 464 | tcp | RFC3244 | |
| kpasswd | 464 | udp | RFC3244 | |
| photuris | 468 | tcp | RFC2522 | |
| photuris | 468 | udp | RFC2522 | |
| isakmp | 500 | tcp | RFC7296 | |
| isakmp | 500 | udp | RFC7296 | |
| syslog | 514 | tcp | RFC5426 | |
| syslog | 514 | udp | RFC5426 | |
| printer | 515 | tcp | RFC1179 | |
| printer | 515 | udp | RFC1179 | |
| router | 520 | tcp | RFC2453 | |
| router | 520 | udp | RFC2453 | |
| ripng | 521 | tcp | RFC2080 | |
| ripng | 521 | udp | RFC2080 | |
| rtsp | 554 | tcp | RFC7826 | |
| rtsp | 554 | udp | RFC7826 | |
| vemmi | 575 | tcp | RFC2122 | |
| vemmi | 575 | udp | RFC2122 | |
| ipp | 631 | tcp | RFC8010 | |
| ipp | 631 | udp | RFC8010 | |
| msdp | 639 | tcp | RFC3618 | |
| msdp | 639 | udp | RFC3618 | |
| ldp | 646 | tcp | RFC3036 | |
| ldp | 646 | udp | RFC3036 | |
| rrp | 648 | tcp | RFC2832 | |
| rrp | 648 | udp | RFC2832 | |
| aodv | 654 | tcp | RFC3561 | |
| aodv | 654 | udp | RFC3561 | |
| acap | 674 | tcp | RFC2244 | |
| acap | 674 | udp | RFC2244 | |
| olsr | 698 | tcp | RFC3626 | |
| olsr | 698 | udp | RFC3626 | |
| agentx | 705 | tcp | RFC2741 | |
| agentx | 705 | udp | RFC2741 | |
+-----------+----------+--------------+-------------+---------------+
As part of this maintenance effort, IANA [will further add/has
further added] the following entry in addition to the existing entry
for port 441 with the IESG as Assignee and the IETF chair as Contact:
Kuehlewind & Tanamal Expires August 13, 2020 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Reassignment of System Ports February 2020
+---------+--------+-----------+-----------+------------------------+
| Service | Port | Transport | Reference | Assignment Notes |
| Name | Number | protocol | | |
+---------+--------+-----------+-----------+------------------------+
| rmt | 441 | tcp | RFC1202 | For historical |
| | | | | reasons, multiple |
| | | | | registrations exist |
| | | | | for the same port |
| | | | | number. Clients need |
| | | | | to have prior |
| | | | | knowledge of which |
| | | | | service is provided by |
| | | | | the server on that |
| | | | | port in order to make |
| | | | | use of it. |
+---------+--------+-----------+-----------+------------------------+
3. Security Considerations
This draft instructs IANA to perform actions on the Service Name and
Transport Protocol Port Number Registry. It does not change the use
of the ports or protocols running on them. Therefore the security of
these protocols is not impacted by these changes to the registry.
4. References
4.1. Normative References
[RFC6335] Cotton, M., Eggert, L., Touch, J., Westerlund, M., and S.
Cheshire, "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
Procedures for the Management of the Service Name and
Transport Protocol Port Number Registry", BCP 165,
RFC 6335, DOI 10.17487/RFC6335, August 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6335>.
4.2. Informative References
[RFC4844] Daigle, L., Ed. and Internet Architecture Board, "The RFC
Series and RFC Editor", RFC 4844, DOI 10.17487/RFC4844,
July 2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4844>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
Kuehlewind & Tanamal Expires August 13, 2020 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Reassignment of System Ports February 2020
Authors' Addresses
Mirja Kuehlewind (editor)
Ericsson GmbH
Email: ietf@kuehlewind.net
Sabrina Tanamal
Email: sabrina.tanamal@iana.org
Kuehlewind & Tanamal Expires August 13, 2020 [Page 8]