Re: service names - one registry vs. two registries

[Patrik Fältström <patrik at frobbit.se>]

Also, the various registries have had different goals. For example,  
IANA registering port numbers so that they are unique, and then a  
descriptive string. Not a string -> port mapping for SRV record usage.  
Other registries have other design goals.

But, yes, better if there only would be one, but... The merge/ 
description of the registry must be done in a careful way.

   Patrik

On 9 nov 2009, at 07.22, Marc Blanchet wrote:

> my 2 cents:
> - roughly, it does not matter.
> - I have a slight bias towards one single registry so that all  
> assignments related to "transport services" are in one place.  
> simpler for implementors, for protocol designers, etc... so voting  
> for one registry for easier to find info.
>
> Marc.
>
> Lars Eggert a écrit :
> > Hi,
> > as just briefly discussed in the APP area meeting after Joe's  
> > presentation, we need to come to some community consensus on what  
> > to do with service name registrations.
> > draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports has been written with the intent to  
> > unify the three(*) current places where service names can be  
> > registered, making the ports and service names registry the one- 
> > stop shop for ports and service names. All service names (~10K?)  
> > registered in one of the current three places would be  
> > grandfathered in.
> > draft-gudmundsson-dns-srv-iana-registry advocates a creating new  
> > standalone registry for service names that are to be used with DNS  
> > SRV RRs (exclusively, in my reading) and seed it with only those 40  
> > service names that are specifically called out in published RFCs.  
> > There is no discussion on how the new registry relates to the three 
> > (*) existing places where service names have currently been  
> > registered.
> > (Disclaimer: I'm an author of draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports, so you  
> > should read the two documents to form your own opinion on the  
> > different proposals.)
> > So far, the discussion has mostly seen arguments from the  
> > proponents of both approaches. It would be useful to hear from the  
> > broader community on which general approach is preferable.
> > Lars
> > (*)
> > http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers
> > http://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names
> > http://www.dns-sd.org/ServiceTypes.html
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > Apps-Discuss mailing list
> > Apps-Discuss at ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Apps-Discuss mailing list
> Apps-Discuss at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss