IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [BEHAVE] comment on draft-li-behave-nat444-test-00, FTP active/passive

"Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com> Wed, 11 July 2012 15:07 UTC

Return-Path: <dwing@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B497621F8555 for <behave@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 08:07:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.469
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.469 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.130, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id djdzHx4thJU1 for <behave@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 08:07:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8FF121F852D for <behave@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 08:07:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=dwing@cisco.com; l=2297; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1342019277; x=1343228877; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date: message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QX7lXzp9IKhO3l1dmqpGBgmFP02KnOWbyh1njDFl2LU=; b=W9W8IAhH+p8o7oEl+HmX6xS2Mx1JKtE2VxAPY0fXsO7zj/3wiuHnywcO H1a5fCbbKw18J7m/LOUYOXvcEhkFixO8y4ELqiHwUuGGT2BLzHIoCXnca t/onTfqY/2NgQqVu6SrsVmbywH+599GQ3zHumLcqW/ES7Rj/K/+qeuZHm 0=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFAFWW/U+rRDoJ/2dsb2JhbABFqDuPKoEHgiABAQEDAQEBAQUKARcQNAsFBwEDAgkPAgQBASgHGQ4VCgkIAQEEARILF4dlBQydQqAdBItAhW4DiEuFBZYKgWaCfw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,567,1336348800"; d="scan'208";a="49073039"
Received: from mtv-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.58.9]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Jul 2012 15:07:56 +0000
Received: from dwingWS (sjc-vpn5-356.cisco.com [10.21.89.100]) by mtv-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q6BF7uD2031754; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:07:56 GMT
From: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
To: "'Zhangzongjian (Thomas)'" <zhangzhongjian@huawei.com>, draft-li-behave-nat444-test@tools.ietf.org, 15301588336@189.cn, 15306188213@189.cn, liuchunlin@jsptpd.com, "'Will Liu (Shucheng)'" <liushucheng@huawei.com>
References: <085801cd5efb$8344aa50$89cdfef0$@com> <0B2F754289D27B449F7F1B95456B77544EDB63D7@szxeml524-mbs.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <0B2F754289D27B449F7F1B95456B77544EDB63D7@szxeml524-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 08:07:56 -0700
Message-ID: <09b901cd5f76$f3ccfe50$db66faf0$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Ac1e+4L5W6hTgdXpSUKgVBZ9YLoKkgAGaJ/wABgzjYA=
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: behave@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] comment on draft-li-behave-nat444-test-00, FTP active/passive
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:07:26 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: behave-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:behave-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Zhangzongjian (Thomas)
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 8:40 PM
> To: Dan Wing; draft-li-behave-nat444-test@tools.ietf.org;
> 15301588336@189.cn; 15306188213@189.cn; liuchunlin@jsptpd.com; Will Liu
> (Shucheng)
> Cc: behave@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] comment on draft-li-behave-nat444-test-00, FTP
> active/passive
> 
> Dear Dan
> In fact we tested the typical FTP active model as an illustration for
> the FTP scenarios.

My statistics show that active FTP is not typical.  Several years ago I
obtained logs from ftp.cisco.com and 99% of our connections were
passive-mode FTP.  It was only one user, downloading several files, that was
using active-mode FTP, and had an IP address belonging to Boeing.  All web
browsers do passive-mode FTP by default or exclusively, including IE 7 and
up, Safari, Firefox, Opera, and Chrome.

Do you have statistics showing a high number of active mode FTP?  Perhaps
this is caused by IE 6, which I know is still used extensively in China, and
defaults to active-mode FTP.  It would be interesting to know how often
active mode FTP is used considering it would also require FTP ALG support in
existing WiFi access points (restaurants, hotels, and airports).

> In such an example, the FTP server is in public
> networks and FTP client is in private network. Thanks for your
> comments. We will add the detailed description in the next version.

Thanks, that would be helpful.  As you know, passive FTP does not need an
FTP ALG.

-d


> Thomas
> Best regards
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Wing [mailto:dwing@cisco.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 8:24 AM
> To: draft-li-behave-nat444-test@tools.ietf.org; 15301588336@189.cn;
> 15306188213@189.cn; liuchunlin@jsptpd.com; Will Liu (Shucheng);
> Zhangzongjian (Thomas)
> Subject: comment on draft-li-behave-nat444-test-00, FTP active/passive
> 
> Hi.
> 
> It would be helpful in your FTP test results if you indicated if
> passive
> (PASV) or active mode was tested.
> 
> -d
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Behave mailing list
> Behave@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email