Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1998 20:07:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> To: Studded <Studded@dal.net> Cc: Brian Somers <brian@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc services Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.980711200330.9865A-100000@current1.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <35A818B8.E9235620@dal.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 11 Jul 1998, Studded wrote:
> Julian Elischer wrote:
> >
> > IRC used divert?
> >
> > On Fri, 3 Jul 1998, Brian Somers wrote:
> >
> > > brian 1998/07/03 18:58:17 PDT
> > >
> > > Modified files: (Branch: RELENG_2_2)
> > > etc services
> > > Log:
> > > MFC: 6668/divert -> 8668/divert. IRC uses 6668.
^^^^^^ ^^^^^^
there was no clash to start with...
>
> Ports 6660-6669 are very commonly used as ports to connect to ircd on.
> Port 6667 is by far the most common, and 6668 is a very common alternate
> port.
>
This is irrelevant..
IRC does not use the DIVERT PROTOCOL
the port spaces are not shared.
For one, divert is only valid within a single machine.
One number is as good as another but it's a pointless edit.
> Hope this helps,
well it lets me know there was no real reason..
But it's not worth shifting it back..8668 will do just fine.
>
> Doug
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.980711200330.9865A-100000>