Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@???> writes:
> It'd be unfortunate to take that stance, since auth is the canonical
> name of the service, while ident is an alias. See RFC1700.
Philip Hazel <ph10@???> writes:
< I disagree. From RFC 1413:
<
< The Identification Protocol was formerly called the Authentication
< Server Protocol. It has been renamed to better reflect its function.
...
< I note that RFC 1700 is now nearly 5 years old. I think things have
< moved on, and in particular, as I noted, other forms of "real
< authentication" are now on the scene (RFCs 2222, 2554, for example).
Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@???> writes:
> Cool. I've regarded RFC1700 as authoritative because it has no "Updated
> by" / "Obsoleted by" references. I don't have a problem changing my
> perspective on this one because...
Note that RFC 1700 declares itself obsolescent in the following terms:
| This RFC is a snapshot of the ongoing process of the assignment of
| protocol parameters for the Internet protocol suite. To make the
| current information readily available the assignments are kept up-to-
| date in a set of online text files.
If you check <
ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/port-numbers>
you will find that these days "ident" is listed ahead of "auth" as a name
for the 113/tcp service.
Chris Thompson
Email: cet1@???
