I agree with Eliot, I don't think a scan is needed to make a decision here. Having managed several networks that would not have allowed you access from some random scanner, I don't think you'll get all the data you are looking for. In a well managed network, the IDS/IPS should detect that it is a scan and block all future probes once you hit a small number of ports/IPs. So you may get a small sample with everything else failing within an address block. Granted, not all networks are managed well and you may get a good amount of data.
If this connection was expected to a few servers, then a network manager might just allow those only on the assigned port. Without any hat on, I agree that a port + 443 as an alternate is a good plan. Kathleen On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Randy Bush <ra...@psg.com> wrote: >> Isn't this precisely what .well-known was meant to address? > > fun small research project. what percentage of well-known ports can > you connect to from the outside to a machine inside cisco? hell, to > what percentage of well-known ports outside cisco can you reach from > inside? > > well-known does not correlate well with open to access by IT security > departments. > > randy > > _______________________________________________ > Acme mailing list > Acme@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme -- Best regards, Kathleen _______________________________________________ Acme mailing list Acme@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
