[taeric]

Sorta? If it renders them moot, why not attack the policies? For that matter, if there are no implications to the number of the port, I'm again forced to ask why not just use the higher numbers? Wouldn't that have let you use the "simplicity of standard socket code" with no extra effort?

(This is also a new use of "moot" to me? You seem to be offering it as a synonym of obsolete? But a "moot" debate is one that is closer to "overcome by events" than one that is not relevant. Right?)

[tptacek]

You get that these are just people shipping a program that random people are going to run on random computers, right? If your go-to-market involves "reversing longstanding Unix network policy rules", you have problems.

Respectfully, if at this point the situation hasn't been made clear to you, I don't think there's much more to productively discuss.

[taeric]

Amusingly, I would do an appeal to a word you already used. :D I was treating this as a bit of a moot debate. Discussing it as much for interests in the general discussion.

My impression from something said elsewhere was that this was largely for internal tools. I'm not sure why I got that impression, though.

I think it is fair, btw, that I would be pushing for both paths, at this point? If a long standing network policy rule has become obsolete from advance, it is worth considering dropping it? Is that not something people are looking at?

(I will also note that I will not be at all offended if you drop out from lack of interest here. Apologies if you feel I was wasting your time!)