Re: [ftpext] I-D Action:draft-ietf-ftpext2-hash-00.txt

Sob <sob@nvnet.cz> Thu, 06 January 2011 01:03 UTC

Return-Path: <sob@nvnet.cz>
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 DFFA63A6D79 for <ftpext@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:03:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.603
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.603 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_CZ=0.445, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
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 g+ytaLP6ln6F for <ftpext@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:03:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.nvnet.cz (mail.nvnet.cz [IPv6:2002:d5d3:2ff6:80::3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63CD63A6D1C for <ftpext@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:03:30 -0800 (PST)
X-AuthUser: sob@nvnet.cz
Received: from Sob-PC.nvnet.cz ([213.211.47.246]:58578) by mail.nvnet.cz with [XMail 1.25 ESMTP Server] id <S1ADB> for <ftpext@ietf.org> from <sob@nvnet.cz>; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 02:05:36 +0100
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 02:01:58 +0100
To: Anthony Bryan <anthonybryan@gmail.com>
From: Sob <sob@nvnet.cz>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik4Lg_NQNDhRSfBki94Qkfdk_-52-AW0s+icezu@mail.gmail.c om>
References: <20101124224501.31531.96663.idtracker@localhost> <4CEDAA9A.8030303@kimmeringer.de> <AANLkTik8Bv9YKo+uPt0ntk9OS0qQW2T5_RJ56CFZxMnS@mail.gmail.com> <4CEF00C0.5050200@gmail.com> <AANLkTimFeub1ynp4UcKAv84GP9f=gcG485jUgT82mB87@mail.gmail.com> <4CEFDCB9.6010203@gmail.com> <AANLkTi=i5A4RogvHLJuhsRJ0cFOOYGHkAk+aDwEvg_o7@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTik4Lg_NQNDhRSfBki94Qkfdk_-52-AW0s+icezu@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Message-Id: <20110106010331.63CD63A6D1C@core3.amsl.com>
Cc: ftpext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ftpext] I-D Action:draft-ietf-ftpext2-hash-00.txt
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 01:03:33 -0000

At 23:16 3.1.2011, anthonybryan@gmail.com wrote:
>    S> 213 SHA-256 f0ad929cd259957e160ea442eb80986b5f... filename.ext
>802816 1000000

Range information after filename doesn't seem to be the best idea. If 
optional, then it's wrong, because it can't be told if it's there or 
if it's part of filename. If mandatory, then it would work and only 
doesn't look nice.

Rather than inventing new custom reply format, wouldn't it be better 
to adopt MLSx style? It's simple, readable, extensible, ...

E.g.:

   S> 213 Hash.SHA-256=f0ad929cd...;Range=802816-1000000; filename.ext

And the relation between HASH and MLSx doesn't necessarily have to 
end with this. Hash as optional MLSx fact would be nice answer to 
already requested hashes for multiple files at the same time.

--