Re: [ftpext] RFC Errata for consideration

["William F. Maton" <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Anthony Bryan wrote:

>> Now the interesting question to ask is this:  GIven the listing of RFCs,
>> which ones have actually been adopted for use versus partially versus
>> ignored?  For that, we'd need more implementor participants I think, plus a
>> survey of archives from the old ftpext to determine that.
>
> I know people from curl, FileZilla, IIS, SmartFTP, Serv-U/FTP Voyager,
> and others are on this list.
>
> I've contacted others too. who else do we need to engage?

I have contacted a couple of draft authors from the past to invite their 
interest as well.  We'll see if the mob gels into a working group or it 
flies madly off in all directions.

But I think that if the willingness isn't there to create a consolidation 
of 959 et al, then perhaps it will be a catalyst to generate new work and 
review other FTP work.

wfms