RFC 2817:Upgrading to TLS Within HTTP/1.1
RFC-Ref

port


Click on the red underlined text to get to the source

... HTTP alone by a unique URI scheme and the TCP port number. The scheme 'http' meant the HTTP protocol alone on port ...
... TCP port number. The scheme 'http' meant the HTTP protocol alone on port 80, while 'https' meant the HTTP protocol over SSL on ...
... HTTP protocol over SSL on port 443. Parallel well-known port numbers have similarly been requested -- and in some cases, granted -- to distinguish between ...
... SSL on port 443. Parallel well-known port numbers have similarly been requested -- and in some cases, granted -- to distinguish between secured and unsecured use of other application protocols ...
... application protocols (e.g. snews, ftps). This approach effectively halves the number of available well known ports. ...
... Area Directors and the IESG reaffirmed that the practice of issuing parallel "secure" port numbers should be deprecated. The HTTP/1.1 Upgrade mechanism can apply Transport Layer Security ...
... In the nearly two years since, there has been broad acceptance of the concept behind this proposal, but little interest in implementing alternatives to port 443 for generic Web browsing. In fact, nothing in this memo affects the current interpretation of https: URIs. ...


... 2], which is to say the host name and port number destination of the requested connection ...
... proxy has established a connection to the requested host and port, and has switched to tunneling the current connection ...


... security risks. First, such authorization should be limited to a small number of known ports. The Upgrade: mechanism defined here only requires onward tunneling at ...
... The Upgrade: mechanism defined here only requires onward tunneling at port 80. Second, since tunneled data is opaque to the proxy, there ...
... tunneling to other well-known or reserved ports. A putative HTTP client CONNECTing to port 25 could relay spam ...
... ports. A putative HTTP client CONNECTing to port 25 could relay spam via SMTP ...



Google
Web
RFC-Ref