IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ftpext] FWD: ftp/959 reboot

Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se> Mon, 09 August 2010 21:11 UTC

Return-Path: <daniel@haxx.se>
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 3878C3A69CA for <ftpext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Aug 2010 14:11:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.613
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.613 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.364, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35]
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 gnOMIN0zR5bA for <ftpext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Aug 2010 14:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from giant.haxx.se (giant.haxx.se [80.67.6.50]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB7A03A67B7 for <ftpext@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Aug 2010 14:11:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from giant.haxx.se (giant.haxx.se [80.67.6.50]) by giant.haxx.se (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1) with ESMTP id o79LBjXK019215; Mon, 9 Aug 2010 23:11:45 +0200
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 23:11:45 +0200
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
X-X-Sender: dast@giant.haxx.se
To: Anthony Bryan <anthonybryan@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=1ePodG=2G9Ta-=5Fut6x-bQxvq8eLXsVgaUjh@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1008092256460.10815@tvnag.unkk.fr>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1008051641520.24282@iskra.ottix.net> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1008052249300.11871@tvnag.unkk.fr> <AANLkTi=1ePodG=2G9Ta-=5Fut6x-bQxvq8eLXsVgaUjh@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
X-fromdanielhimself: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
X-Greylist: Default is to whitelist mail, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.3.5 (giant.haxx.se [80.67.6.50]); Mon, 09 Aug 2010 23:11:46 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: ftpext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ftpext] FWD: ftp/959 reboot
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: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 21:11:13 -0000

On Mon, 9 Aug 2010, Anthony Bryan wrote:

> Daniel, any thoughts/insight into the RFC 1123 discussion, which appears to 
> update RFC 959?

Yes, it seems to update or at least clarify a lot of RFC959 details but I must 
admit I've never really used 1123 much as a reference. I really can't tell at 
this point how valuable those sections are or aren't.

> with inspiration from httpbis, I've been working on a collection of
> FTP RFCs: 959, 2389, 2428, 2577 (for now).

I would suggest 3659 to be one of the main RFCs for any modern FTP 
implementation, thanks mostly to SIZE and MTDM in my own case.

> http://www.metalinker.org/test/ftp/draft-bryan-ftpbis-00.txt

Very cool.

I noticed how it mentions RFC3659 describes REST as an extension, but that's 
slightly inaccurate. RFC959 includes REST already, it was just clarified and 
more detailed in RFC3659.

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email