Are port numbers really that precious (particularly if we can allow for a
>1024 port allocation) that we have to force Deep Packet Inspection on
systems that want to disallow non-TLS traffic, or at least, to identify it so
that mis-configured clients can be fixed?
Alan DeKok wrote:
> For exa
On Dec 29, 2023, at 1:58 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Are port numbers really that precious (particularly if we can allow for a
>> 1024 port allocation) that we have to force Deep Packet Inspection on
> systems that want to disallow non-TLS traffic, or at least, to identify it so
> that mis-con
