[oasisbob]

It's not a bad idea, though I'm not sure why someone would want to do this on their own in a bolt-on manner. For an example of a place where demux is encouraged, see RFC 6335:

Conservation of the port number space is required because this space is a limited resource, so applications are expected to participate in the traffic demultiplexing process where feasible. The port numbers are expected to encode as little information as possible that will still enable an application to perform further demultiplexing by itself. [...] IANA strives to assign only one assigned port number per service or application.

Why do I know this? Consul by default uses 5-6 ports, and one of them conflicts with an IETF registered port in-use by our data center provider. Was hoping that the RFCs gave some ammo for a resolution in my favor, came out more humble and wondering if Consul really needed that many ports.

[vidarh]

Modern apps seems to do their best to require lots of ports numbers, often with very little justification. It's incredibly annoying.

Some of it understandable, e.g. when one port is for stuff that is always meant to stay behind your firewall, and another for public access. In that case it actually makes things easier to do properly. But so often it appears to be entirely gratuitous.