Re: Pg and Stunnel

Any suggestions on which port to use (or is there a defined one) to be the
end of a stunnel?
Type slowly, I'm old and only starting to get into this stunnel stuff.
I've done a cook book tunnel but now want to standardize the procedure and
make sure I won't step on any toes (defined services) later down the line.

TIA,
Rod
--
"Open Source Software - Sometimes you get more than you paid for..."

ones to avoid
---------------
http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers

You might try 5433/4

Roderick A. Anderson wrote:
> Any suggestions on which port to use (or is there a defined one) to be the
> end of a stunnel?
> Type slowly, I'm old and only starting to get into this stunnel stuff.
> I've done a cook book tunnel but now want to standardize the procedure and
> make sure I won't step on any toes (defined services) later down the line.
>
>
> TIA,
> Rod

On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Dennis Gearon wrote:

> ones to avoid
> ---------------
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers

I keep forgetting about this.

> You might try 5433/4

Yeah this makes sense but I wanted to see what others might be using. The
tutorial from the Pg (or friend) site uses 5430 which is already assigned.

I've also considered the high numbers; to quote from the link above:

The Dynamic and/or Private Ports are those from 49152 through 65535

I'll kludge for awhile and gather more evidence of others doin's.

Thanks for the pointer.

Rod
--
"Open Source Software - Sometimes you get more than you paid for..."

"Roderick A. Anderson" <raanders(at)acm(dot)org> writes:
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Dennis Gearon wrote:
>> You might try 5433/4

> Yeah this makes sense but I wanted to see what others might be using. The
> tutorial from the Pg (or friend) site uses 5430 which is already assigned.

The 5433/4 numbers could get assigned at any minute, too. That doesn't
mean they'd suddenly be likely to be in use on your site, though. Most
of the protocols with recently-assigned numbers are pretty dang obscure.

Still, I'd lean to using one of the port numbers above 49k. If you have
a conflict, at least no one can accuse you of ignoring published specs.

regards, tom lane

One thing I have already seen is that 5433/34 are used for an alternate copy of
pgsql, so two versions can be run at the same time. It would be best to use one
up above.

I'm pretty sure that the dynamic port software which moves HTML links from 80/81
up to the high area just avoids ones that you have assigned.

BTW, do other protocols like pgsql, mysql, ftp, others use the dynamic port
allocation?

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Roderick A. Anderson" <raanders(at)acm(dot)org> writes:
>
>>On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Dennis Gearon wrote:
>>
>>>You might try 5433/4
>
>
>>Yeah this makes sense but I wanted to see what others might be using. The
>>tutorial from the Pg (or friend) site uses 5430 which is already assigned.
>
>
> The 5433/4 numbers could get assigned at any minute, too. That doesn't
> mean they'd suddenly be likely to be in use on your site, though. Most
> of the protocols with recently-assigned numbers are pretty dang obscure.
>
> Still, I'd lean to using one of the port numbers above 49k. If you have
> a conflict, at least no one can accuse you of ignoring published specs.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>