On Thu, 7 Apr 2022, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
It is a bit stupid but nut uses a different port for so long that, to be honest, I do not think that it matters any more.
It was not too bright of IANA to assign 401/TCP (ups) when 3493/TCP (nut) was already available, but the problem was probably lack of visibility to IANA of 3493 (nut) as a UPS management port back in 2008.
Finally, the current assignment that uses TLS should be more than sufficient to support STARTTLS on the same port, so no new assignment for a separate secure port should be needed, regardless of in what range it is requested.She was not wrong, if we factor in scarcity of port resources and the way STARTTLS works
Agreed, I said much the same in the I-D Section 7 "ÏANA Considerations". I would like NUT to be able to use "ups", and the names are not a scarce resource.
Roger
_______________________________________________ Nut-upsuser mailing list Nut-upsuser@alioth-lists.debian.net https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser
