Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

OpenTelemetry should use an allowed port #1148

Closed
bboreham opened this issue Oct 28, 2020 · 40 comments
Closed

OpenTelemetry should use an allowed port #1148

bboreham opened this issue Oct 28, 2020 · 40 comments
Assignees
Labels
area:miscellaneous For issues that don't match any other area label priority:p1 Highest priority level release:required-for-ga Must be resolved before GA release, or nice to have before GA spec:protocol Related to the specification/protocol directory

Comments

@bboreham
Copy link

What are you trying to achieve?

Conformance with Internet standards.

What did you expect to see?

A port number in the range of User Ports, and ideally one assigned by IANA.

Additional context.

OpenTelemetry is using port 55680. According to RFC 6335,

a port number in [the Dynamic Ports range (49152-65535)] MUST NOT be used as a service identifier.

On a practical front, ports in the high range are usually allocated dynamically by the operating system, so there is some random chance 55680 is in use for that purpose and your OpenTelemetry receiver will not start.

@bboreham bboreham added the spec:protocol Related to the specification/protocol directory label Oct 28, 2020
@andrewhsu andrewhsu added priority:p1 Highest priority level release:required-for-ga Must be resolved before GA release, or nice to have before GA area:miscellaneous For issues that don't match any other area label labels Oct 30, 2020
@andrewhsu
Copy link
Member

from the spec issue triage mtg today, setting to P1 so we can have a quick decision. perhaps setting the port number a required parameter will allow us to set it to a default we want to choose later.

@mtwo
Copy link
Member

mtwo commented Oct 30, 2020

Following up from the same meeting. I'm making an IANA application now. I'll include the governance committee and @tigrannajaryan in all communications with them.

@mtwo
Copy link
Member

mtwo commented Oct 30, 2020

@tigrannajaryan @bogdandrutu three questions that I need answered before I file this:

  • Do we have a list of defined TXT keys? I've entered our service name as 'otlp'
  • "Please describe how your protocol supports security" - what should I enter for this
  • I'm assuming that we only use TCP and don't use UDP - is this accurate?

@Oberon00
Copy link
Member

Please describe how your protocol supports security

I would assume it is enough to mention that the protocol is HTTPS based (it is, right?)

@mtwo
Copy link
Member

mtwo commented Oct 30, 2020

@Oberon00 I added this: "OTLP uses client transfer security by default. While users can opt out by enabling the OTEL_EXPORTER_OTLP_METRIC_INSECURE SDK flags, we do not expect this to be common."

@tigrannajaryan let me know what I should enter for the list of TXT keys and I'll submit.

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

Does this proposal mean we need to change the default port? It will break a bunch of software that relies on the defaults.

@mtwo
Copy link
Member

mtwo commented Oct 30, 2020

It does. Do you think the benefits of having a reserved port outweigh the pre-GA change? Bogdan also proposed an alternative of making the port a required parameter during RC and then defaulting it (via an optional parameter) to the newly-assigned port at GA.

If you think that it's too late and we should stick with our current port, then we can close this and I won't submit the request to the IANA.

@bboreham
Copy link
Author

Server-side you can have the code listen to both old and new ports. The only hard break is for new-built clients that cannot be configured to talk to old servers.

@mtwo
Copy link
Member

mtwo commented Nov 2, 2020

I'll add this as a discussion topic at Wednesday's Collector SIG meeting

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

Let's discuss. Perhaps we can come up with some transitional backwards compatibility plan, e.g. receive on both old and new port during a transition period.

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

Also, we need 2 ports. OTLP/HTTP uses a different port 55681.

@Oberon00
Copy link
Member

Oberon00 commented Nov 3, 2020

Why doesn't OTLP/HTTP use the normal HTTP port?

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

@Oberon00 technical limitations of Go-based implementation: open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1223

It may be possible to overcome the limitation and I'd highly prefer to use the same port if possible. We have an open issue open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 but no known solution yet.

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

Why doesn't OTLP/HTTP use the normal HTTP port?

@Oberon00 I think I misread your question. What do you mean by normal HTTP port? 80/443? They are privileged port numbers and I don't think we want to impose root permissions as a requirement to use OTLP/HTTP.

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

Discussed this in TC meeting today. We are going to look into 2 issues before making a decision on this:

  • Are we able to have a reasonably painless transition for existing OTLP users (old/new port number support on sending/receiving side). I will look into this.
  • Are we able to use one port for OTLP/gRPC and OTLP/HTTP. Depending on this we may need to request registration for 1 port or for 2 ports. @bogdandrutu is going to look into this.

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

I had a quick look at the old/new port number support.

  • It is not difficult to support receiving on both ports simultaneously in the Collector. We will update the OTLP receiver in the Collector to use a new default. The OTLP receiver will also enable the legacy port receiving when the default configuration is used. This way any users that have the default (omitted) port in the Collector config file will not be affected because of the change of the default port. User that have non-default port in the config likewise won't be affected since the port is explicitly specified. We will keep this dual port receiving for a few months and can retire the legacy port eventually.

  • Collector's OTLP exporter currently requires that the destination host and port are explicitly specified. So changing the default port in the OTLP specification has no effect on OTLP exporter in the Collector.

  • The SDK exporters have a notion of the default OTLP port, so if we change the default then existing applications/instrumentations will be affected. However, given that vast majority of SDKs are expected to send to the Collector the SDKs will work fine before or after the default port is changed in the SDK provided that the Collector is updated first to the new version which supports receiving on both ports.

  • Backends that currently implement may continue using the legacy port number provided that they are receiving from the Collector where that port number is explicitly specified (this should be the majority of use cases). Backends will be however advised to change to the new port or support receiving of both ports like Collector does.

I believe this is sufficient to change the port number without causing pain to current users. Once we have the outcome of the investigation from Bogdan we can move forward.

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

@bboreham @mtwo what does IANA registration process require? Do we choose a port number and then apply for registration or we ask for IANA to choose a port number for us first? If it is the former then I assume we just pick something that shows as "Unassigned" in the IANA list?

@mtwo
Copy link
Member

mtwo commented Nov 5, 2020 via email

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

OK, from what I see 4317-4319 range is unassigned. We can request 4317 and if it turns out OTLP/HTTP needs a separate port then 4318 in addition to that (unless port choices were already made - I don't see anything in this thread).

@mtwo
Copy link
Member

mtwo commented Nov 6, 2020 via email

@tigrannajaryan
Copy link
Member

@mtwo I do not fully understand what the TXT record is for in the context of port registration. Can you clarify or point me to the relevant part in the port registration RFC?

Assuming this is the name of the protocol we may need to wait until we have a decision about using 1 or 2 ports. If it is one port we will call it "otlp", if 2 ports then it will be "otlp/grpc" and "otlp/http".

tigrannajaryan added a commit to tigrannajaryan/opentelemetry-specification that referenced this issue Jul 30, 2021
Related to open-telemetry#1816
Fixes open-telemetry#1835

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry#1148 (comment)
tigrannajaryan added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 3, 2021
Related to #1816
Fixes #1835

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
#1148 (comment)
tigrannajaryan added a commit to tigrannajaryan/opentelemetry-specification that referenced this issue Sep 27, 2021
Related to open-telemetry#1816
Fixes open-telemetry#1835
Fixes open-telemetry#1920

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry#1148 (comment)

There was also a draft PR to merge the ports in the Collector but it was not completed:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#3765

Note that this change was initially submitted in PR open-telemetry#1839
and then reverted in PR open-telemetry#1847
because we hoped that the merging could be successfully done. We believe that we should
no longer pursue this and should consider the ports separate from now on.
tigrannajaryan added a commit to tigrannajaryan/opentelemetry-specification that referenced this issue Sep 27, 2021
Related to open-telemetry#1816
Fixes open-telemetry#1835
Fixes open-telemetry#1920

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry#1148 (comment)

There was also a draft PR to merge the ports in the Collector but it was not completed:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#3765

Note that this change was initially submitted in PR open-telemetry#1839
and then reverted in PR open-telemetry#1847
because we hoped that the merging could be successfully done. We believe that we should
no longer pursue this and should consider the ports separate from now on.
tigrannajaryan added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 29, 2021
Related to #1816
Fixes #1835
Fixes #1920

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
#1148 (comment)

There was also a draft PR to merge the ports in the Collector but it was not completed:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#3765

Note that this change was initially submitted in PR #1839
and then reverted in PR #1847
because we hoped that the merging could be successfully done. We believe that we should
no longer pursue this and should consider the ports separate from now on.

Note 2: we consider this a spec bug fix (spec was impossible to implement), rather than a 
functionality change, that's why we believe this is an allowed change.
tigrannajaryan added a commit to tigrannajaryan/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Apr 20, 2023
* Change default OTLP port number

Contributes to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148

Note that a separate port is used for OTLP/HTTP for now. There is currently work
in progress to confirm that we can use the same port. Once we have the confirmation
I will update the spec again to use one port.

* Address PR comments
tigrannajaryan added a commit to tigrannajaryan/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Apr 20, 2023
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)
tigrannajaryan added a commit to tigrannajaryan/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Apr 20, 2023
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1920

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)

There was also a draft PR to merge the ports in the Collector but it was not completed:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#3765

Note that this change was initially submitted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1839
and then reverted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1847
because we hoped that the merging could be successfully done. We believe that we should
no longer pursue this and should consider the ports separate from now on.

Note 2: we consider this a spec bug fix (spec was impossible to implement), rather than a
functionality change, that's why we believe this is an allowed change.
tigrannajaryan added a commit to tigrannajaryan/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Apr 21, 2023
* Change default OTLP port number

Contributes to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148

Note that a separate port is used for OTLP/HTTP for now. There is currently work
in progress to confirm that we can use the same port. Once we have the confirmation
I will update the spec again to use one port.

* Address PR comments
tigrannajaryan added a commit to tigrannajaryan/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Apr 21, 2023
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)
tigrannajaryan added a commit to tigrannajaryan/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Apr 21, 2023
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1920

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)

There was also a draft PR to merge the ports in the Collector but it was not completed:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#3765

Note that this change was initially submitted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1839
and then reverted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1847
because we hoped that the merging could be successfully done. We believe that we should
no longer pursue this and should consider the ports separate from now on.

Note 2: we consider this a spec bug fix (spec was impossible to implement), rather than a
functionality change, that's why we believe this is an allowed change.
tigrannajaryan added a commit to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Apr 27, 2023
* Change default OTLP port number

Contributes to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148

Note that a separate port is used for OTLP/HTTP for now. There is currently work
in progress to confirm that we can use the same port. Once we have the confirmation
I will update the spec again to use one port.

* Address PR comments
tigrannajaryan added a commit to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Apr 27, 2023
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)
tigrannajaryan added a commit to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Apr 27, 2023
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1920

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)

There was also a draft PR to merge the ports in the Collector but it was not completed:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#3765

Note that this change was initially submitted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1839
and then reverted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1847
because we hoped that the merging could be successfully done. We believe that we should
no longer pursue this and should consider the ports separate from now on.

Note 2: we consider this a spec bug fix (spec was impossible to implement), rather than a
functionality change, that's why we believe this is an allowed change.
joaopgrassi pushed a commit to dynatrace-oss-contrib/semantic-conventions that referenced this issue Mar 21, 2024
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1920

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)

There was also a draft PR to merge the ports in the Collector but it was not completed:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#3765

Note that this change was initially submitted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1839
and then reverted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1847
because we hoped that the merging could be successfully done. We believe that we should
no longer pursue this and should consider the ports separate from now on.

Note 2: we consider this a spec bug fix (spec was impossible to implement), rather than a 
functionality change, that's why we believe this is an allowed change.
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
* Change default OTLP port number

Contributes to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148

Note that a separate port is used for OTLP/HTTP for now. There is currently work
in progress to confirm that we can use the same port. Once we have the confirmation
I will update the spec again to use one port.

* Address PR comments
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1920

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)

There was also a draft PR to merge the ports in the Collector but it was not completed:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#3765

Note that this change was initially submitted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1839
and then reverted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1847
because we hoped that the merging could be successfully done. We believe that we should
no longer pursue this and should consider the ports separate from now on.

Note 2: we consider this a spec bug fix (spec was impossible to implement), rather than a
functionality change, that's why we believe this is an allowed change.
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
* Change default OTLP port number

Contributes to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148

Note that a separate port is used for OTLP/HTTP for now. There is currently work
in progress to confirm that we can use the same port. Once we have the confirmation
I will update the spec again to use one port.

* Address PR comments
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1920

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)

There was also a draft PR to merge the ports in the Collector but it was not completed:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#3765

Note that this change was initially submitted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1839
and then reverted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1847
because we hoped that the merging could be successfully done. We believe that we should
no longer pursue this and should consider the ports separate from now on.

Note 2: we consider this a spec bug fix (spec was impossible to implement), rather than a
functionality change, that's why we believe this is an allowed change.
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
* Change default OTLP port number

Contributes to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148

Note that a separate port is used for OTLP/HTTP for now. There is currently work
in progress to confirm that we can use the same port. Once we have the confirmation
I will update the spec again to use one port.

* Address PR comments
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1920

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)

There was also a draft PR to merge the ports in the Collector but it was not completed:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#3765

Note that this change was initially submitted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1839
and then reverted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1847
because we hoped that the merging could be successfully done. We believe that we should
no longer pursue this and should consider the ports separate from now on.

Note 2: we consider this a spec bug fix (spec was impossible to implement), rather than a
functionality change, that's why we believe this is an allowed change.
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
* Change default OTLP port number

Contributes to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148

Note that a separate port is used for OTLP/HTTP for now. There is currently work
in progress to confirm that we can use the same port. Once we have the confirmation
I will update the spec again to use one port.

* Address PR comments
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)
VinozzZ pushed a commit to VinozzZ/opentelemetry-proto that referenced this issue Jun 21, 2024
Related to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1816
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1835
Fixes open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1920

Some historical context: we wanted to make grpc and http use the same port and we
had an open issue in the Collector to do so:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256

The conclusion is that there are technical hurdles that make it unfeasible:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#1256 (comment)

Because of that we need to keep grpc and http ports separate. This means we need to
change the spec to say that otlp/http uses port 4318. Once this PR is merged we
will also need to submit for port 4318 registration with IANA like we did previously
with port 4317:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1148 (comment)

There was also a draft PR to merge the ports in the Collector but it was not completed:
open-telemetry/opentelemetry-collector#3765

Note that this change was initially submitted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1839
and then reverted in PR open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#1847
because we hoped that the merging could be successfully done. We believe that we should
no longer pursue this and should consider the ports separate from now on.

Note 2: we consider this a spec bug fix (spec was impossible to implement), rather than a
functionality change, that's why we believe this is an allowed change.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:miscellaneous For issues that don't match any other area label priority:p1 Highest priority level release:required-for-ga Must be resolved before GA release, or nice to have before GA spec:protocol Related to the specification/protocol directory
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants