Re: [ftpext] FWD: ftp/959 reboot

Anthony Bryan <> Mon, 09 August 2010 19:17 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724213A69C0 for <>; Mon, 9 Aug 2010 12:17:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.298
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.929, BAYES_50=0.001, SARE_PROLOSTOCK_SYM3=1.63]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M+1iAHCVVWJw for <>; Mon, 9 Aug 2010 12:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 077843A67F2 for <>; Mon, 9 Aug 2010 12:17:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gxk20 with SMTP id 20so2055091gxk.31 for <>; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 12:17:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=NlgsRUfXu0hzuHOcPZ5o7mjTQ+fu4zGhGqnwLs24pOY=; b=W5bTVdmMjvEnP+LrNVD3jAfO2IxyBnIp8B7Ju+/rHygmlY+rgi4Mv+cSjXF2+g27j2 U+y363cf0Nbg2RDsREEr8dG+z2XI7Hy8IC9ZqnsEKCMUxu5uQN7tFRgCWPjLFYIjO72j 1ffJM8lP8hHTOOaKxvXUFVJlS1r+mucdhpmas=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=YPAjhd6KqqYzS9YvJM3LYFsoSDlPUO6tElXd6fHvLAXD5ru2Bpvp2NsF+xuNajQ2N+ DW2Lot0eYg21+FTuANn9n+u2aUTDIllEbVUXGM8OH5+bHA9ydzfBLoHj9RcxLNV3Ng71 0mC6YI+A8fTGxNhU1r3bqGqeiErSPwaR/DbN0=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id d2mr11188803agb.44.1281381470964; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 12:17:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Mon, 9 Aug 2010 12:17:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 15:17:50 -0400
Message-ID: <>
From: Anthony Bryan <>
To: Daniel Stenberg <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [ftpext] FWD: ftp/959 reboot
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 19:17:18 -0000

On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Daniel Stenberg <> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, William F. Maton wrote (quoting Gregory Lundberg):
>> Anyone today who attempts to determine what the protocol *is* has to look
>> at far to many RFCs, some offering contradictory specifications.  This is
>> unacceptable for one of the core protocols of the Internet.
> I can only agree that the situation is muddy and far from good.

Daniel, any thoughts/insight into the RFC 1123 discussion, which
appears to update RFC 959?

>> Another thing I'd suggest looking at is avoiding any semantic meaning for
>> the data channel.  The term "file" is often used.  But the data channel is
>> just a data channel.  Once established, the FTP really does not care what is
>> sent, which direction it goes, or if data is travelling both wats at the
>> same time. The job of the FTP is to reliably and securely establish the data
>> channel between two resources; nothing more.
> I agree. I supposed we could look for inspirations for this in the httpbis
> work.

with inspiration from httpbis, I've been working on a collection of
FTP RFCs: 959, 2389, 2428, 2577 (for now).

the idea would be to have an updated, coherent, harmonious document of
RFCs concerning FTP along
with implementation and real world info like httpbis.

so far, besides collecting the RFCs and errata together, there are no
real changes to text. here's the changelog:

    Incorporate [RFC0959] Errata.
    Incorporate [RFC2389] FEAT at Section 4.1.4.
    Incorporate [RFC2428] "FTP Extensions for IPv6 and NATs" at Section
    Incorporate [RFC2577] in Section 10.
    Include abstract of [RFC4217] in Section 10.2.
    BCP 14 wording.

TODO if there is interest:

    Determine if changes in RFC 1123 should be applied.
    Triage and include or reference other FTP RFCs - RFC 2228, 2640,
2773?, 3659, 4217.
    Update BNF to ABNF.
    Standardize command organization (subsections?) like EPRT/EPSV,
with separated ABNF?
    Move the whole sentence that is Section 8 into Section 3.2?

(( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ ]
  )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads