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