zane, I'm going to provide comments here locally first to make sure we're all on the same page. Once I do that, please respond back to the iana with what I said if we're all in agreement
On 08/25/2011 04:58 PM, Pearl Liang via RT wrote:
The Port Experts Team has review your application (included below). The team has the following questions with respect to your request:
I'd like to summarize what I understand of the application, and then ask a question or two:
This application is for an additional TCP port 49000 for a service called "matahari", to be used for configuration management of QMF/QPid implementations. Justification for this port assignment seems to be that privileged communications must be separated from normal operations, and that QMF will run atop Matahari. Given this, aren't we really talking about a newer version of AMQP? Could not the AMQP version be bumped? We seek more information as to why precisely different ports should be used.
(response to iana) matahari is a specific usage of AMQP (via an implementation called qpid (qpid.apache.org)). The reason for a separate port is that end users may want to run a vanilla AMQP service on their hosts which is logically separate from the matahari AMQP bus. We cannot force generic users of AMQP to coexist their services with ours, so we request a separate port so that our specific usage of AMQP can remain logically separate. Also, QMF does not run atop matahari. Matahari runs atop QMF, which itself runs atop qpid (which is the AMQP implementation)
Also, there is an inconsistency in the application:
The applicant has stated that multicast may be used, and yet the application is only for TCP. This is generally inadvisable and impracticable, given the state machine that TCP uses.
(internal comments) multicast does not need to be used. This is just point to point TCP.
AMQP itself can optionally use multicast when running clustered brokers via Corosync/Openais, but I don't think we will ever need to run clustered brokers in a matahari deployment. So I think mention of multicast here should just be removed
(response to iana) Multicast mention here was a mistake. This is just pure point to point TCP