Skip to Main Content
IBM Power Ideas Portal

This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM Power Systems products, including IBM i. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (

Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.

Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM. - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.

Status Not under consideration
Workspace IBM i
Categories Networking
Created by Guest
Created on Sep 9, 2016

Need to prevent port hijacking

TCP/IP Ports Required for Access for Windows and Related Functions as specified in IBM technical document N1019667 should be reserved for those functions and never assigned to other functions by any IBM program. I do not consider this to be an enhancement, but rather a bug fix, but am requesting an "enhancement" per the response from IBM to PMR 35311,057,649.

Use Case:

During an IPL process on July 17, 2016, even though the STRTCPSVR command was issued prior to the STRHOSTSVR command, port 8471, required for server as-database, was hijacked by the HTTP Administration server resulting in over six hours downtime. Explanation by IBM was that there was a "race" for the port and the Admin server won. It is my contention that a "race" for a port required by a supported IBM function should never occur. If the port is required for a function, then it should be reserved, in all cases, for that function.

Idea priority High
  • Guest
    May 28, 2019

    IBM does not intend to provide a solution to this request at this time, so it is being closed.

  • Guest
    May 25, 2017

    Modifying the ADDTCPPORT configuration with the suggested additional feature is not an option. New infrastructure implementing an application name restriction would be needed. The cost to implement this is quite high compared to the benefit.

  • Guest
    May 23, 2017

    Due to processing by IBM, this request was reassigned to have the following updated attributes:
    Brand - Servers and Systems Software
    Product family - Power Systems
    Product - IBM i
    Component - Networking
    Operating system - IBM i
    Source - Other

    For recording keeping, the previous attributes were:
    Brand - Servers and Systems Software
    Product family - Power Systems
    Product - IBM i
    Component - Core OS
    Operating system - IBM i
    Source - Other

  • Guest
    Sep 10, 2016

    Creating a new RFE based on Community RFE #94375 in product IBM i.