use standard, unassigned ports for the daemon

[anarcat]

port 8080 is often in use on servers. it's the case here, and blocks that part of the daemon from starting up:

anarcat@marcos:~$ ipfs daemon
Initializing daemon...
API server listening on /ip4/127.0.0.1/tcp/5001
Gateway (readonly) server listening on /ip4/127.0.0.1/tcp/8080
23:18:02.772 ERROR   cmd/ipfs: listen tcp 127.0.0.1:8080: bind: address already in use <autogenerated>:24

IANA allocated port 8080 to web caches:

http-alt        8080/tcp        webcache        # WWW caching service

...but it's frequently squatted by a hodge-podge array of random offenders (e.g. Icecast, in my case, Apache Tomcat, Syncthing, etc). ipfs is the latest addition to the stack. :p

5001 is allocated to an obscure:

commplex-link      5001        tcp

... but it is also used by iperf (oh that could be pretty fireworks), Slingbox and Synology, according to Wikipedia.

the port should at least be customizable, maybe it is, but ipfs daemon --help doesn't tell me how.

i also believe a standard port pair should be requested from IANA, unless an RFC is made for HTTP/3 and the ipfs port becomes 80. :p but maybe that's a separate issue?

at least finding less busy ports would be a good idea. according to wikipedia at least 8082, 8084 and 8085 are free if you like the 80XX range, and 5020+ is also free.

For more sources on ports:

• IANA
• Wikipedia
• FreeBSD's /etc/services
• Debian's

[jbenet]

ports are already customizable. you can change them in the config. See:

ipfs config Addresses.Gateway
ipfs config Addresses.API
ipfs config Addresses.Swarm
ipfs config Addresses

they can be set like:

ipfs config Addresses.Gateway /ip4/0.0.0.0/tcp/9001

the port should at least be customizable, maybe it is, but ipfs daemon --help doesn't tell me how.

Agreed ipfs daemon should note ability to change config values for ports. i've changed the title of this issue accordingly.

[whyrusleeping]

I agree that we should probably avoid 8080

[anarcat]

if you don't mind, i created a PR for documenting the ports changing procedure in #879. we can therefore keep this ticket for changing the default ports to more standard behaviour.

[jbenet]

@anarcat on the ports, the reasoning for 8080 is what a lot of developers use to develop things, so it's a familiar place. agreed that it's annoying to clash-- but i would like to keep the gateway in the 8000/9000 range. 8888 is also typical, but less nice.

I dont care much about it, whatever works and is intuitive to people.

[drathir]

I guess is also needed a change of the default port 5001, because port is used by iperf program by default...

[lidel]

We had a related discussion recently (@batcer in #1678 (comment) and myself):

http://localhost:8080

Not a good idea. I have Apache Tomcat on port 8080 and it is by default.
Doesn't IPFS deserve dedicated port by default? Why use so common one?

(..)

8080 (..) follows unwritten convention championed by other HTTP proxies (a port in 8xxx range).

(..)

Moving to something like 8001 would unify the 'look and feel' of default ports, and solve us some setup time.

The gist: 8080 is very popular and often clashes with other software, using something else (in 8xxx range) would remove need of changing deault port for a lot of people.

[jbenet]

Yes, ok -- I think we should use something like:

• Swarm: 4737 (IPFS)
• Gateway: 8X80
• API: 8(X + 1)80

Maybe X=1 ?

Some port clashing will be inevitable, and configurability is fine. But
making the common case is nice.

One thing to note: lots of ipfs things today assume localhost:8080 so we
should itemize them to update them.

On Thursday, October 8, 2015, Marcin Rataj notifications@github.com wrote:

We had a related discussion in #1678 (comment)
#1678 (comment):

http://localhost:8080

Not a good idea. I have Apache Tomcat on port 8080 and it is by default.
Doesn't IPFS deserve dedicated port by default? Why use so common one?

(..)

8080 (..) follows unwritten convention championed by other HTTP proxies (a
port in 8xxx range).

(..)

Moving to something like 8001 would unify the 'look and feel' of default
ports, and solve us some setup time.

The gist: 8080 is very popular and often clashes with other software,
using something else (in 8xxx range) would remove need of changing deault
port for a lot of people.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#874 (comment).