Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: > "sftp" in port-numbers refers to port 115, with usage > described in RFC 913, which is declared Historic, and is most > likely unused in Real Life. And it's definitely no IANA registered URI-scheme like "tftp": <http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes> It's also not mentioned in an old and unofficial collection: <http://www.w3.org/Addressing/schemes.html> The latter is interesting for unregistered schemes like snews. > sftp as defined in draft-ietf-secsh-scp-sftp-ssh-uri-03.txt > defines an URI scheme, and doesn't need a separate port > number. IMHO it should say which default port it's talking about for the <port> part of <authority> in its chapter 2.2. If I got this right the scheme "sftp" is also unrelated to the service "ftps" (989 and 990). > I agree it's confusing, but it's not really a conflict. > There exist other "secure FTP" protocols, such as RFC 2228. The sftp-draft could mention those "near misses". Bye, Frank _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf