Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 13:10:09 -0800 From: Paul Traina <pst@juniper.net> To: "Stephen J. Roznowski" <sjr@home.net> Cc: dg@root.com, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Status of kern/5402 -- can someone process? Message-ID: <199802212110.NAA23019@heap.juniper.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 20 Feb 1998 22:22:41 EST." <199802210322.WAA05064@istari.home.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The problem is that the "IANA" standard isn't the standard. It's a new standard that adds no value and considerable confusion to the issue. When a majority of other UNIX hosts have changed to this standard, we should think about it. Not until then. The IANA port range change was a mistake. Paul In message <199802210322.WAA05064@istari.home.net>, "Stephen J. Roznowski" writ es: > > From: David Greenman <dg@root.com> > > > > >On 31 Dec 1997, I submitted a PR (kern/5402) updating in_pcb.c to > > >reflect current IANA port ranges.... > > > > > >Any chance of getting someone to process this (or close it)? > > > > Last I recall on this subject was that our current port ranges were the > > desired ones and certain people might become murderous if they were changed > . > > Well, I can't really think of a technical reason why one range should > be preferred over the other, and in that case, I would have hoped that > FreeBSD would follow the "standard". > > I'd appreciate hearing what the objections are (privately is fine). > > If the architects are in agreement to keep the existing port range, > then this PR can be closed. > > Thanks, > -SR > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199802212110.NAA23019>