IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ftpext] RFC Errata for consideration

"William F. Maton" <wmaton@ottix.net> Thu, 05 August 2010 19:53 UTC

Return-Path: <wmaton@ottix.net>
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 032BC3A6831 for <ftpext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 12:53:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 uje8LQERKSVm for <ftpext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 12:53:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from iskra.ottix.net (iskra.ottix.net [IPv6:2001:410:90ff::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 079B63A690D for <ftpext@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 12:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from iskra.ottix.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by iskra.ottix.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o75JsIhr001669 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 5 Aug 2010 15:54:18 -0400
X-DomainKeys: Sendmail DomainKeys Filter v1.0.2 iskra.ottix.net o75JsIhr001669
Received: from localhost (wmaton@localhost) by iskra.ottix.net (8.14.4/8.14.3/Submit) with ESMTP id o75JsHjC001666; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 15:54:17 -0400
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 15:54:17 -0400
From: "William F. Maton" <wmaton@ottix.net>
To: Anthony Bryan <anthonybryan@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=+ZKwug2+czAAMWxFqFqo3hP3_4vng_yX0ydpV@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1008051551490.24282@iskra.ottix.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1007301540330.15461@iskra.ottix.net> <AANLkTimqJxcTzH2BQM+NhGixM5Z+kpSVnUBauQSiqftJ@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1008031843520.2300@iskra.ottix.net> <AANLkTi=+ZKwug2+czAAMWxFqFqo3hP3_4vng_yX0ydpV@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Cc: ftpext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ftpext] RFC Errata for consideration
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, 05 Aug 2010 19:53:56 -0000

On Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Anthony Bryan wrote:

> I'm hoping someone who knows more about the policy will provide some 
>guidance...

+1

> RFC 1123 doesn't come up on a search for "FTP" on the RFC editor site
> ( http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html ). is it authoritative?
> that is, does it update/supersede RFC 959? I brought it up because I
> might as well apply the changes to the RFC 959bis I'd been working on
> here are the RFCs that I found that could be added to RFC 959's
> Appendix III "RFCs on FTP" (aka a list of all FTP RFCs).

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.

wfms

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email