[Standards-JIG] Why is S2S on 5269 and not 5222?

Chris Mullins chris.mullins at coversant.net
Fri Dec 1 22:24:58 UTC 2006

I'm scoping some upcoming S2S work in our server, and I keep wondering
why S2S connections are on a different port than standard connections?

The way the streams work, it would be simple enough to have the server
decide "what type of stream is this?" without needed a dedicated port

This eliminates another firewall hole, and makes configuration that much

SRV records would still be there, and would just specify 5222 as the
port, rather than the current 5269. 

The only thing that comes to mind is the ability to do port forwarding
for s2s, which (as long as the port is configurable) can still be done.

Chris Mullins

More information about the Standards mailing list