See my quote from RFC 6335. Of course re-assignment of de-assigned ports would only happen after all never-assigned ports, of the same type, have been assigned.
Thanks,
Donald
===============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
d3e3e3@xxxxxxxxx
Donald
===============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
d3e3e3@xxxxxxxxx
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 2:21 PM Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Nick Hilliard <nick@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Murray S. Kucherawy wrote on 07/05/2020 15:19:
>> The community is invited to provide comments on this change. We would
>> like to move forward on or after May 31st
> Please do. POP2 hasn't been seen in the wild for decades.
I agree!
Is there a timeline by which port 109 could be reassigned?
Would we just put this at the end of the list of unassigned <1024 ports?
Or is that a separate decision?
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
