[Twisted-Python] "Ports" vs. "Listeners"

Kevin Turner acapnotic at twistedmatrix.com
Mon Jul 30 22:59:28 EDT 2001

well, since you asked...
"Listener" is very passive, non-directed.  It would be nice if we could
convey the idea of something dedicated/allocated wishing/waiting/hoping
for a _potential connection.  It's not "someone who happens to be
listening" to a broadcast, it's more like "operators are standing by."

Of course, the word "operator" is plainly no good, as it's a loaded term
in this environment.  A close synonym is "receptionist", but that's a
bit unwieldy and doesn't feel quite right to me.  "clerk" is too
general, "teller" (as in bank) doesn't work either.

I'm not sure "port" is really that bad.  It's a point of contact,
something with a *specific address* which may be connected to (which
"Listener" does /not/ convey), something that things traveling
to/from remote locations go through.  And hell, if you're going to use a
phrase like "TCP", you might as well use the standard terminology that
goes with it.  =)

You're right though, in saying that not all ports are for inbound
connections, they're also for outbound connections.  Maybe a qualifier
is in order?

PortListener ListnerPort ListeningPort InPort InboundPort 
ReceptivePort ReceivingPort DockingPort OpenPort
SuckingPort TapPort WatchedPort SentryPort
ok I think I better stop there

Whaddyamean you don't wanna call it

More information about the Twisted-Python mailing list