NAM 1.0 NO IDEA Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

NAM — Naming FTF: Allocation of port number

  • Key: NAM-10
  • Legacy Issue Number: 2885
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Anonymous
  • Summary:

    Summary: The INS Adopted Specification lists port 9999 as a place holder until
    a final allocation of a port number has been made. The apparent intent
    is to register a port number above 1024. The current status hurts
    interoperability of emerging implementations, for the following

    • Use of port number 9999 should be discouraged, as it is already
      registered to Anoop Tewari <>:

    distinct 9999/tcp distinct
    distinct 9999/udp distinct

    • There is already an well-known port number assigned to Christian
      Callsen <>:

    omginitialrefs 900/tcp OMG Initial Refs
    omginitialrefs 900/udp OMG Initial Refs

    Why is an allocation of a port number > 1024 desirable, when a
    well-known port has been assigned already?

    If a different port number is registered with IANA, what is the
    purpose of the port 900 allocation?

    The longer the final value remains undetermined, the more
    implementations will hard-code some value, which is likely to be
    different from the final value, which will give later interoperability

  • Reported: NAM 1.0b1 — Mon, 13 Sep 1999 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — NAM 1.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Application made to IANA for a port assignment. Port number assigned is 2809.

  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT