Closed jiceatscion closed 3 months ago
For the control plane, there seems to be only two IANA consideration to address:
Everything else is AS-internal so requires no IANA arbitration.
Regarding port 30252, it is not even clear if that needs to be a reserved SCION/UDP port, given that it needs not be addressed directly but can be reached by way of a service address (and was once a dynamic port). As for port 30252 in to UDP/IP space, it is an AS-internal configuration anyway, so unless port 30252 needs to be reserved in the SCION/UDP space, it doesn't need to be reserved in the UDP/IP space.
On the other hand, Service Addresses themselves contain a hard-coded well-known number, so we might need to establish a registry for those. However, that would not be in the CP draft but may-be in the DP draft. Opinions welcome.
Update: our internet drafts must not have any IANA actions so, for better or for worse we have to let everything be freely configurable. We might mention that "Informational: The fact that SCION mirrors the UDP port space into the SCION/UDP port space." as a justification for the absence of any IANA action requirement. Otherwise, should we just close this issue?
Hi @jceatscion in the draft we don't have the service discovery part (there was some discussion about this a while ago, and I think we removed it from the drafts, it might be in the old repo)
We discussed this with @jiceatscion and @matzf, port 30252 does not need to be reserved, this is an AS local configuration.
See RFC 8126
(Copied from https://github.com/scionassociation/standards/issues/100)