Re: [ftpext] [BEHAVE] FTP64 LANGuage [was RE: one week WGLC, draft-ietf-behave-ftp64-05]

Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com> Thu, 06 January 2011 01:55 UTC

Return-Path: <dthaler@microsoft.com>
X-Original-To: ftpext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ftpext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C39DE3A6E52; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:55:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.557
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.557 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.042, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5ZGiOrDs+R2v; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:55:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.microsoft.com (mail3.microsoft.com [131.107.115.214]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B281B3A6E55; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:55:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from TK5EX14MLTC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.79.180) by TK5-EXGWY-E803.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.169) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:57:19 -0800
Received: from TK5EX14MLTW651.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com (157.54.71.39) by TK5EX14MLTC102.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.79.180) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.255.3; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:57:18 -0800
Received: from TK5EX14MBXW604.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com ([169.254.4.151]) by TK5EX14MLTW651.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com ([157.54.71.39]) with mapi; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:57:17 -0800
From: Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>
To: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>, 'Iljitsch van Beijnum' <iljitsch@muada.com>
Thread-Topic: [BEHAVE] FTP64 LANGuage [was RE: one week WGLC, draft-ietf-behave-ftp64-05]
Thread-Index: AQHLrTJEjnmEF06JX0uY7W1jdnOAoJPDLGvw
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 01:57:17 +0000
Message-ID: <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF653448AC5B@TK5EX14MBXW604.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
References: <0cac01cb58ea$32d19a60$9874cf20$@com> <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF65343005F2@TK5EX14MBXW601.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <B166ACF7-FA96-4954-8411-A86BC7923A76@muada.com> <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF653447D195@TK5EX14MBXW604.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF653447ECAF@TK5EX14MBXW604.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <8B73074C-5B7E-425F-B8B2-C28757FB7CD6@muada.com> <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF653447F40D@TK5EX14MBXW604.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF653447F599@TK5EX14MBXW604.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <049901cba2cc$238f67e0$6aae37a0$@com> <101F87C4-F714-48C2-852A-67332B712DD1@muada.com> <04a401cba2ce$fdba5180$f92ef480$@com> <B1535EAD-802E-4EF6-ACA5-7F66BCFED987@muada.com> <015d01cbab86$3aa832a0$aff897e0$@com> <4AFCA9F5-CA3A-48EF-87AB-7ADC165956B2@muada.com> <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF6534487CCF@TK5EX14MBXW604.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <1BF1B9D6-B649-48A5-B B4A-F31F2BCC4E72@muada.com> <097701cbad32$3e8bf200$bba3d600$@com>
In-Reply-To: <097701cbad32$3e8bf200$bba3d600$@com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "draft-ietf-behave-ftp64@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-behave-ftp64@tools.ietf.org>, "ftpext@ietf.org" <ftpext@ietf.org>, 'Behave WG' <behave@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ftpext] [BEHAVE] FTP64 LANGuage [was RE: one week WGLC, draft-ietf-behave-ftp64-05]
X-BeenThere: ftpext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ftpext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ftpext>, <mailto:ftpext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ftpext>
List-Post: <mailto:ftpext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ftpext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ftpext>, <mailto:ftpext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 01:55:12 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: behave-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:behave-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Dan Wing
> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 3:43 PM
> To: 'Iljitsch van Beijnum'; Dave Thaler
> Cc: draft-ietf-behave-ftp64@tools.ietf.org; ftpext@ietf.org; 'Behave WG'
> Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] FTP64 LANGuage [was RE: one week WGLC, draft-ietf-
> behave-ftp64-05]
> 
> > On 5 jan. 2011, at 17:11, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > 	And I agree with Iljitsch's
> > 	implication that the recommendation for FTP64 ALGs should be the
> same
> > 	as whatever the recommendation for other FTP ALGs (e.g. in
> > NAT44's) is.
> >
> > Failing to quit while I'm ahead...
> >
> > Are there any FTP44 ALG recommendations?
> 
> I am only aware of
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3027#section-4.1

In the interest of making progress on FTP64...

Given that the LANG/FEAT problem is not specific to FTP64 but applies to
44 ALGs (or any other type of FTP ALG for that matter), I think this problem
is probably best addressed outside of the FTP64 spec itself, and if an answer
existed in another doc, the FTP64 spec would just refer to it.

As such, I think I am ok with not solving the problem in the FTP64 spec,
and leaving it for future work.  However, I would like to see a note 
to that effect added to FTP64.   In other words, I can live with it being
unspecified in FTP64 as long as FTP64 calls out the issue and says it's left
for future work and points out that it's not specific to a 64 case.

While that may result in bad behavior, it's no worse than the situation
we're already in today where LANG behavior is somewhere between 
broken and "unexpected".   In my opinion, the FTPEXT group should 
then decide what it wants to do about LANG (rev RFC 2640 or ignore 
the problem or whatever else).

-Dave