Subject: [Tsvwg] Confirming TSVWG Hum (IANA Allocation Guidelines ID)

From: "James M. Polk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 13:04:07 -0500

TSVWG

Today, TSVWG heard from Michelle Cotton on the Internet Draft "IANA 
Allocation Guidelines for TCP and UDP Port Numbers 
(draft-cotton-tsvwg-iana-ports-00).  This document seems clearly 
tasked for TSVWG. The WG took a hum to adopt this ID as a TSVWG WG item.

The room had 100% hum for, 0% hum against, making this ID a WG item.

Comments in support of, and to the contrary to, this hum are 
encouraged on the WG list before the WG chairs decide to have the 
next revision be a WG item.

James
TSVWG co-chair

---

From: "Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 05:03:14 -0700

I gave this document a quick read and have the following comment. 

- Should the title of the document be something like "IANA Allocation
Guidelines for  transport protocols" ?. After all the intention is to
have consistent mechanism (and therefore a single document) for all
transport port allocation requests which the introduction section of the
document already mentions ?

Just to be clear, I do support this document as a WG item.

Thanks,
-Anantha

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> On Behalf Of James Polk (jmpolk)
> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 11:04 AM
> To: tsvwg
> Subject: [Tsvwg] Confirming TSVWG Hum (IANA Allocation Guidelines ID)
> 
> TSVWG
> 
> Today, TSVWG heard from Michelle Cotton on the Internet Draft 
> "IANA Allocation Guidelines for TCP and UDP Port Numbers 
> (draft-cotton-tsvwg-iana-ports-00).  This document seems 
> clearly tasked for TSVWG. The WG took a hum to adopt this ID 
> as a TSVWG WG item.
> 
> encouraged on the WG list before the WG chairs decide to have 
> the next revision be a WG item.
> 
> James
> TSVWG co-chair
> 
>

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:10:17 -0400

> document already mentions ?

Probably not, there is a good reason to have this focus on TCP and UDP. 
There currently are a document in DCCP that is working on updating the 
DCCP rules, including the complexities of service codes 
(draft-ietf-dccp-serv-codes). However, SCTP will also need some updates 
in the end. But it is TCP and UDP that are the critical.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone +46 8 4048287
Torshamsgatan 23           | Fax   +46 8 7575550
S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------