BIP: register with IANA for bitcoin/cryptocoin port numbers

I believe this is self-explainatory:

1) Bitcoin usually runs on port 8333. Why?

2) Bitcoin does not show in up http://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.xhtml .. why?

3) What needs to happen to have someone from the Bitcoin foundation
  to fill out the form asking for an assigned port (see
  http://www.iana.org/form/ports-services )

4) what should the process be for new cryptocoins to get both default port numbers, as well as P2P network identifier 'magic numbers'

On 3 January 2014 06:22, Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@hozed•org> wrote:

> I believe this is self-explainatory:
>
> 1) Bitcoin usually runs on port 8333. Why?
>
> 2) Bitcoin does not show in up
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.xhtml.. why?
>
> 3) What needs to happen to have someone from the Bitcoin foundation
>   to fill out the form asking for an assigned port (see
>   http://www.iana.org/form/ports-services )
>
> 4) what should the process be for new cryptocoins to get both default
> port numbers, as well as P2P network identifier 'magic numbers'
>

IANA normally register ports with the principle of conservation in mind. See section 7.2 of RFC6335 for more details.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6335#section-7.2

8333 and 18333 are currently unassigned, which is good news.

Ideally it would be good to have two ports, one for the main net, and one for the test net. However, in light of conservation only one may be granted. The question as to whether traffic could be multiplexed over a single port may be raised.

tnp                8321        udp    Thin(ium) Network Protocol
[Aly_Orady]                                        [Aly_Orady]
                                      2007-08-07
                 8322-8350            Unassigned
server-find        8351        tcp    Server Find
[Chris_Brown]                                      [Chris_Brown]

gv-pf              18262       udp    GV NetConfig Service
[Scott_Libert]                                     [Scott_Libert]
                                      2008-01-29
                18263-18462           Unassigned
ac-cluster         18463       tcp    AC Cluster
[Lisa_Zhong]

http://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.txt

If a whole slew of alt coins also tried to reserve ports, I suspect that may raise eyebrows.

>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
> organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
> affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your
> Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics
> Pro!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@hozed•org> wrote:

> I believe this is self-explainatory:
>
> 1) Bitcoin usually runs on port 8333. Why?
>
> 2) Bitcoin does not show in up http://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.xhtml .. why?
>
> 3) What needs to happen to have someone from the Bitcoin foundation
>   to fill out the form asking for an assigned port (see
>   http://www.iana.org/form/ports-services )

I have requested an assignment.

>
> Ideally it would be good to have two ports, one for the main net, and one
> for the test net.  However, in light of conservation only one may be
> granted.  The question as to whether traffic could be multiplexed over a
> single port may be raised.
>

I'm sure it would be *possible*, but testnet and mainnet are entirely separate networks. Not only that, but the entire point of the testnet is separation. There is no logic to multiplexing them.

If conservation is an issue, I'd forgo the testnet port. We don't have a 'test ssh' or 'test mail server' port either, most people will just allocate a temporary number for those themselves.

In case the port is already in use, bitcoin can run on and announce any another port. There is no strict need for it to be 8333 (or 18333) at all.

There isn't even an argument for convenience. Most of the time, users don't specify nodes. And in the rare cases that they do they can specify a port as well.

If a whole slew of alt coins also tried to reserve ports, I suspect that

> may raise eyebrows.
>

That's somebody else's problem. Bitcoin is by far the most well-known of the 'coins' so it may be considered realistic to allocate one or two ports for it. Or not, in which case the altcoins can forget it too.

Regards, Wladimir