> From: "Theo de Raadt" <dera...@openbsd.org>
> Date: Thu, 06 May 2021 10:26:31 -0600
> 
> Jan Klemkow <j.klem...@wemelug.de> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 12:18:43PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > I would like a further justification for removing these ports from
> > > the very limited dynamic reserved space used by bindresvport.
> > > 
> > > (but not by rresvport, which appears still stomp over them)
> > > 
> > > For tcp, 32 of the 512 are locked out.
> > > For udp, 19.
> > > 
> > > What software is actually using these ports?
> > > 
> > > Is that software irrelevant these days?
> > 
> > I'm working on a diff to bring ftps with libtls into our ftpd(8).  There
> > is a "getaddrinfo(NULL, "ftps", &hints, &res0)" call, which uses this
> > port.  Thus, I made this change.
> 
> Hang on -- does the world want ftps support?

I was going to ask the same thing.  I mean even with encryption the
FTP protocol still is a bad idea given all the problems with NAT
traversal and such.

Reply via email to