Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] How to avoid dissection based on port defined by a different
Date Index · Thread Index · Other Months · All Mailing Lists
Date Prev · Date Next · Thread Prev · Thread Next
From: Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 21:05:50 -0800

On Dec 15, 2010, at 8:26 PM, Chris Maynard wrote:

Guy Harris <guy@...> writes:

SHOULD in some RFC - or even a MUST - but I don't know offhand what RFC that is)

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119

Sorry, I didn't make it clear that "what RFC that is" is "what RFC - if any - says that ephemeral ports should be handed out by default", not "what RFC explains what SHOULD and MUST mean".  *Is* there an RFC that describes well-known, registered, and ephemeral ports?  The first two of them are mentioned in the IANA port number assignment list:


but that doesn't mention ephemeral ports.