Re: mboned: UDP port conflict mtrace/traceroute

On 2019-07-29 10:09, Warren Kumari wrote: 

....

> Just FYI, I sent email to IANA letting them know that ports 33435 -
> 33534 should probably be listed it as "Known Unauthorized Use".
> From some archaeology, 33434 is apparently 2^15 + 666, and the
> "standard" traceroutes use up to 100 ports.
> I based this on the Van Jacobson ([email protected]) - 1988 which he
> "stole" (credited) from Steve Deering -- easiest location of code is:
> https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/blob/master/contrib/traceroute/traceroute.c
> 
> I don't much like referring to it as "Known Unauthorized Use" but
> that's technically what it is -- the important bit to me seems to be
> that we make in some way so they don't get handed out, exactly what
> they should be called is a less pressing problem.

Although that's helpful to those seeing traffic on those ports, it does
not prevent IANA from assigning those values when requested. 

The only way to do that would be to make them ASSIGNED. That happens by
the process indicated in RFCs 6335 and 7605 and notably is not driven by
this sort of "squatting". 

NOTE: at the time that code was originally developed (1988), that range
was OK for such uses without registration, but times changed in 1992. 

That code ought to be fixed. 

Joe

_______________________________________________
MBONED mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mboned