Re: [ftpext] New Version of FTP HASH, RANG, LOCK, and HOST

Anthony Bryan <anthonybryan@gmail.com> Sat, 02 February 2013 04:26 UTC

Return-Path: <anthonybryan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ftpext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ftpext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B67481F0D00 for <ftpext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 20:26:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2bwCdXgGTP5a for <ftpext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 20:26:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ia0-x232.google.com (ia-in-x0232.1e100.net [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c02::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE1171F0CFE for <ftpext@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 20:26:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ia0-f178.google.com with SMTP id y26so6140126iab.23 for <ftpext@ietf.org>; Fri, 01 Feb 2013 20:26:06 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=uLtYMUqekd4aJ86Rkva3Ji7m8bV6RrAxfehbRztEhR8=; b=PjgWhcCR2bN243ZesezoceHTSe8tkJFFejXCCE/EduL8aq4NiXm3ffHOn6Fa+ej4hU qYG55B8lVgSpk+LcmlqIlkBSK+HzuMX7/ZkeVzi3HofVBBgeUOUKShb7eRD3w6wNVRuY r+q0V9Gh1WA50Y36bSSlLW2Oe6WAQdIiES7mPTC1sSkzocOSBS90bD4QczcNlxyMWFfk V7p1DeUrwH+S2Gdi49nKjrCvAxwPXGF9eSNeTFu7X/llJwk4EKP58zr6/5eT/k6c/HwI fZoBaEP6VCqJnRLBbsBUsphsqk/aOzKf37UvKRrw1PjKSTjwhFwhgWcIAJiCe+YeH4Wj KTEA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.217.167 with SMTP id oz7mr682487igc.26.1359779166016; Fri, 01 Feb 2013 20:26:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.50.191.231 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Feb 2013 20:26:05 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <5105BDA8.7000006@gmail.com>
References: <CANqTPegPaMBF9i1gi+M3m5FXzuxRzUU_QULxB_sdJTVd7NGppQ@mail.gmail.com> <51009243.4080809@gmail.com> <51056391.2070901@gmail.com> <03ec01cdfcbc$b247bef0$16d73cd0$@texis.com> <5105BDA8.7000006@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 23:26:05 -0500
Message-ID: <CANqTPehG4erM8k622DV8Ou6DLGkpfM92RewUVA69KwA6hetxQg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Anthony Bryan <anthonybryan@gmail.com>
To: bblackshaw@gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "ftpext@ietf.org" <ftpext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ftpext] New Version of FTP HASH, RANG, LOCK, and HOST
X-BeenThere: ftpext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ftpext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Sat, 02 Feb 2013 04:26:08 -0000

right, we could leave the boundary REQUIRED but have an OPTIONAL size
that would be used (probably the majority of the time?)

btw, we are working on some of the issues that have been brought up w/
RANG & LOCK so we put new versions out.
we'll continue on this & should have more updates soon.

the RANG text has been re-organized to reflect that it is not transfer
specific, but just about selecting a range, that can be used with
transfers, HASH, etc, as it always has been.

fancy diffs:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bryan-ftp-range
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bryan-ftp-lock

On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Bruce Blackshaw <bblackshaw@gmail.com>; wrote:
> It's true that you don't always know the size at the start.
>
> Nonetheless, it could be be specified that iff the size of the raw data is
> known, then "size" could be used. In the many cases that this is possible,
> performance should be faster (although I can't quantify by how much).
>
> regards
>
> Bruce Blackshaw
>
>
> On 28/01/2013 4:32 AM, Alun Jones wrote:
>>>
>>> Of Ángel González
>>>
>>> Bruce Blackshaw wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Re LOCK, I think it would be useful to have an alternative to
>>>> "boundary" called "size", that could provide the size of the raw data
>>>> for binary transfers.  That might provide quite a performance
>>>> advantage compared to having to search for the boundary.
>>>>
>>>> regards
>>>
>>> Good point. I think it would be much more useful than the boundary
>>> method.
>>> The value of such size parameter should be the amount of data sent on the
>>> wire.
>>
>> This has an obvious problem - what if the size of the file changes during
>> the transfer?
>>
>> There are many uses of FTP (webcam being the one that comes immediately to
>> mind) where a "file" is retrieved, and is handled as if it is a
>> potentially-infinite stream. We have a webcam at work that encodes video
>> as
>> an animated GIF that never ends. Doesn't display in Internet Explorer,
>> because IE is paranoid, but it's a use-case that should be considered. The
>> boundary method works for this use, where the size method doesn't.
>>
>> Alun.
>> ~~~~
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ftpext mailing list
> ftpext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ftpext



--
(( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ http://www.metalinker.org ]
  )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads