Updating /etc/services with IANA known Port list?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Updating /etc/services with IANA known Port list?

Sebastian Rother
Would it be possible to update/merge the /etc/services with
http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers for 4.0 to have some more
known Services (e.g. usefull in tcpdump-sessions).

Also freeBSD has a lot more entries:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/src/etc/services?rev=1.62.2.17

Kind regards,
Sebastian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Updating /etc/services with IANA known Port list?

Stuart Henderson
On 2006/05/04 15:34, [hidden email] wrote:
> Would it be possible to update/merge the /etc/services with
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers for 4.0 to have some more
> known Services

The way this usually works is, you send a diff, and ask whether it
might be considered for inclusion.

> Also freeBSD has a lot more entries:
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/src/etc/services?rev=1.62.2.17

FreeBSD probably has more developers with time to spend on things
like that.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Updating /etc/services with IANA known Port list?

Sebastian Rother
> On 2006/05/04 15:34, [hidden email] wrote:
>> Would it be possible to update/merge the /etc/services with
>> http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers for 4.0 to have some more
>> known Services
>
> The way this usually works is, you send a diff, and ask whether it
> might be considered for inclusion.
>
>> Also freeBSD has a lot more entries:
>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/src/etc/services?rev=1.62.2.17
>
> FreeBSD probably has more developers with time to spend on things
> like that.

And the way it realy works is: I send a suggestion, developers can choose
maybe USEFULL stuff and include it to the /etc/services.

Max Laier pointed it out:
---
You have to be aware that adding to etc/services means slowing down any
lookup as they are done by simple linear search through the file.  Unless
there is a cache (done in FreeBSD recently [cached(8)]) you would want to
keep that file small.
---

I am aware of this and that`s why I send a request except of sending a
Patch wich wont get include anyway.


Kind regards,
Sebastian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Updating /etc/services with IANA known Port list?

Stuart Henderson
On 2006/05/04 17:34, [hidden email] wrote:
> > FreeBSD probably has more developers with time to spend on things
> > like that.
>
> And the way it realy works is: I send a suggestion, developers can choose
> maybe USEFULL stuff and include it to the /etc/services.

You don't have to be a developer to choose some services which might be
useful to list. I compared with a list from a Linux distribution (more
manageable at ~500 entries rather than FreeBSD's 2000+ or the even
longer list at http://www.graffiti.com/services).

This is about the extent of what I thought may be worth adding:

--- etc/services 20 Nov 2005 19:15:11 -0000 1.63
+++ etc/services 4 May 2006 16:49:54 -0000
@@ -142,2 +142,4 @@
 ekshell 545/tcp # Kerberos encrypted shell
+dhcpv6-client 546/udp
+dhcpv6-server 547/udp
 afpovertcp 548/tcp # AFP over TCP
@@ -213,2 +213,3 @@
 prospero-np 1525/udp
+l2tp 1701/udp l2f # Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol
 pptp 1723/tcp # Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol
@@ -233,2 +236,3 @@
 daap 3689/udp # Digital Audio Access Protocol
+svn 3690/tcp # subversion
 krb524 4444/tcp # Kerberos 5->4

And even then I'm not too sure all these are worthwhile (maybe
just l2tp).

Listing a lot of high-number ports that will often be used as
dynamic source ports can be counter-productive anyway; it clutters
output of 'tcpdump -f' and makes it harder to quickly visually
identify the direction of connections in this and 'netstat'.

> I am aware of this and that`s why I send a request except of sending a
> Patch wich wont get include anyway.

You don't want to spend time on something because it might not be
included? Really... I think that's offensive to any developer that
has spent time developing an API or chunk of code and had to remove
or totally re-work it.

Why not consider a patch as 1) a starting point and 2) proof that
you care enough about what you ask that you're willing to spend time
actually working on it. If your update is sensible, useful and well
thought-out, there aren't very many reasons left not to include it.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Updating /etc/services with IANA known Port list?

Sebastian Rother
> On 2006/05/04 17:34, [hidden email] wrote:
>> > FreeBSD probably has more developers with time to spend on things
>> > like that.
>>
>> And the way it realy works is: I send a suggestion, developers can
>> choose
>> maybe USEFULL stuff and include it to the /etc/services.
>
> You don't have to be a developer to choose some services which might be
> useful to list. I compared with a list from a Linux distribution (more
> manageable at ~500 entries rather than FreeBSD's 2000+ or the even
> longer list at http://www.graffiti.com/services).
>
> This is about the extent of what I thought may be worth adding:
>
> --- etc/services 20 Nov 2005 19:15:11 -0000 1.63
> +++ etc/services 4 May 2006 16:49:54 -0000
> @@ -142,2 +142,4 @@
>  ekshell 545/tcp # Kerberos encrypted shell
> +dhcpv6-client 546/udp
> +dhcpv6-server 547/udp
>  afpovertcp 548/tcp # AFP over TCP
> @@ -213,2 +213,3 @@
>  prospero-np 1525/udp
> +l2tp 1701/udp l2f # Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol
>  pptp 1723/tcp # Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol
> @@ -233,2 +236,3 @@
>  daap 3689/udp # Digital Audio Access Protocol
> +svn 3690/tcp # subversion
>  krb524 4444/tcp # Kerberos 5->4
>
> And even then I'm not too sure all these are worthwhile (maybe
> just l2tp).
>
> Listing a lot of high-number ports that will often be used as
> dynamic source ports can be counter-productive anyway; it clutters
> output of 'tcpdump -f' and makes it harder to quickly visually
> identify the direction of connections in this and 'netstat'.

Correct but on a Windows machine there4s maybe realy a
Windows-Remote-Desktop running on the Windows-Remote-Desktop-Port...

Low port numbers don`t provide ANY security that realy the daemon wich
should run on Port 22 runs on Port 22.
The IANA-List is an asumption of Services wich run "normaly" on the Port.
It`s the same like /etc/services..an assumption, nothing more.
So for me the whole IANA-List is worth adapting...

Until tcpdump wont be bale to detect a protocol by protocol-specific stuff
you can be fooled anyway.

>> I am aware of this and that`s why I send a request except of sending a
>> Patch wich wont get include anyway.
>
> You don't want to spend time on something because it might not be
> included? Really... I think that's offensive to any developer that
> has spent time developing an API or chunk of code and had to remove
> or totally re-work it.
>
> Why not consider a patch as 1) a starting point and 2) proof that
> you care enough about what you ask that you're willing to spend time
> actually working on it. If your update is sensible, useful and well
> thought-out, there aren't very many reasons left not to include it.

If you think so.
I think different and the history of the hydra-port proofs me right.

This talk goes too personal and is not related to tech anymore.
An update of /etc/services would be neat. Nothing more or less.
if you wanna persist on a personal level then please write mails to me
directly and don`t send copies to the list.
Thank you :)

Kind regards,
Sebastian