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

Anthony Bryan <anthonybryan@gmail.com> Sun, 10 March 2013 00:44 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 AF7EF21F846C for <ftpext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Mar 2013 16:44:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 M7ExpvJayuZU for <ftpext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Mar 2013 16:44:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qa0-f45.google.com (mail-qa0-f45.google.com [209.85.216.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC35421F845D for <ftpext@ietf.org>; Sat, 9 Mar 2013 16:44:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id g10so426573qah.4 for <ftpext@ietf.org>; Sat, 09 Mar 2013 16:44:22 -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=eM4X1CdKtik3+jZ6HIYGEB7+W6Q1m55iLLuHIo59icM=; b=BVyS/Z8bOh9nKTwf/YxN2zVgHTT7msZrynDl9BQiPZZRbtRnx5DfE49dsCxZwJYfhT piqCjVUigRq4mAAYRZ79Atskc2YxMyHTof7PEihTuG545wb85gkwmDc5V7lglXvFyUqQ HeoInwV0muol+3Pe9OUEa1Ns71geaPYZF+O9jzRM3HmXfrOS+q8FM8O+MzH7o6ango0s GUFdX1A0RCo+N/+EWtF4i7YrJFOzODZYTDe/QzCnoixt3DnhJt2dOawyd9xcmyBmMHnk nYuHPdjKDKDIq0xzGl9Ixe1PlXlpMMmkQLLh9kxDqOUmMulMFjlMjeFPPi3G+ljVQPSo 01rg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.229.172.162 with SMTP id l34mr2487103qcz.81.1362876262417; Sat, 09 Mar 2013 16:44:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.49.71.140 with HTTP; Sat, 9 Mar 2013 16:44:22 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <5106E7D4.9010505@gmail.com>
References: <CANqTPegPaMBF9i1gi+M3m5FXzuxRzUU_QULxB_sdJTVd7NGppQ@mail.gmail.com> <041a01cdfcea$9fa3a060$deeae120$@texis.com> <5106E7D4.9010505@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2013 19:44:22 -0500
Message-ID: <CANqTPegPHCMPbCe7-1QcWzmxWahgmOADfDwrpwyL42jhV3gySQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Anthony Bryan <anthonybryan@gmail.com>
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C1ngel_Gonz=E1lez?= <keisial@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: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 00:44:23 -0000

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Ángel González <keisial@gmail.com>; wrote:
> On 28/01/13 01:01, Alun Jones wrote:
>> After reading the RANG spec, I note that there isn't anything to state what
>> errors are given by RETR if the range specified is incorrect, or by STOR /
>> APPE if the range specified starts more than one byte after the end of the
>> existing file on the server (and therefore, presumably, incorrect?).

current text is:

The server-PI should reject the STOR if a client issues a RANG with a
start-point greater than the actual file size. If the start-point is
less than or equal to the file size, the file is opened for writing,
continuing at start-point.

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

> I think it should be documented that the server must fill the gap with
> nul bytes,
> with a note that it may use it as a hint to do that using a sparse file.

any other feelings on this?

on a side note, wondering if it might be better to separate RANG and
RETR/STOR/etc_with_RANG into 2 separate drafts.
HASH is also a separate draft that happens to use RANG.

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