RE: HEELLLLOOOOOO: - Re: FW: Application for port-number (more tech)

["Michelle S. Cotton" <cotton@icann.org>]

Hi Harald,

Nothing in the IANA registries have been removed.
I think Bill was just confused that RFC 1700 had
more than just port numbers in it.  He now knows
there were plenty of registries in there.

That's all.

Michelle

-----Original Message-----
From: iesg-admin@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of
Harald Tveit Alvestrand
Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2003 6:58 AM
To: Joyce Reynolds; fenner@research.att.com; fred@cisco.com
Cc: iana@iana.org; iesg@ietf.org; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Re: HEELLLLOOOOOO: - Re: FW: Application for port-number (more
tech)




--On fredag, mai 02, 2003 09:25:31 -0700 Joyce Reynolds <jkrey@ISI.EDU> 
wrote:

>
>
> 1700 Assigned Numbers. J. Reynolds, J. Postel. October 1994. (Format:
>      TXT=458860 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC1340) (Obsoleted by RFC3232) (Also
>      STD0002) (Status: HISTORIC)
>
>
> 3232 Assigned Numbers: RFC 1700 is Replaced by an On-line Database. J.
>      Reynolds, Ed.. January 2002. (Format: TXT=3849 bytes) (Obsoletes
>      RFC1700) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)
>
>
>
> IANA still needs to "replace" the above placeholder with an updated
> document,  but there is no way in hell that a port-numbers registry IS
> the replacement for  the original "Assigned Numbers" RFC.

Joyce, Michelle:

if any of the registries in RFC 1700 are not visible via the IANA web 
pages, without an explicit decision to discontinue that registry, this is a 
bug, and should be fixed.

The IANA registry is FAR more than port numbers.

          Harald