[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Recommended ManageSieve TCP port 2000 is already allocated to Cisco SCCP
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Ned Freed <ned.freed@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> --On Tuesday, January 13, 2009 09:28:27 AM +0100 Arnt Gulbrandsen
> >> <arnt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > Pushing SCCCP out of the way isn't going to work very well... I suggest
> >> > getting a new port (x) and using these rules:
> >> >
> >> > Clients MUST try port x first. If a client gets connection refused on
> >> > the
> >> > right port number, it MAY try 2000, but in that case it should watch out
> >> > for SCCCP. Sieve banners look like <example>, and always contain a line
> >> > starting with "SIEVE " and one starting with "IMPLEMENTATION ". SCCCP
> >> > banners look like <example>, and always <dan?>.
> >> Instead of standardizing a multi-port search procedure, I suggest we
> >> standardize the use of DNS SRV records to discover managesieve servers.
> > Excellent idea. I strongly support doing this.
> The latest ManageSieve draft already does that ;-).
Sorry, forgot that was in there.
Given that support for SRV records is already required, old servers that are
listening on port 2000 can be made to work with a new client that defaults to a
different port simply by adding an appropriate SRV record. And an old client
that goes straight to port 2000 on the named server isn't going to interoperate
with a new SRV-dependent setup anyway. So I see no compelling reason to
continue to mess around with port 2000. Let's just get a new port assigned, put
it in there and be done with it.