Re: [ftpext] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-bryan-ftpext-hash-00.txt

[Bruce Blackshaw <[e-mail]>]

Given that XCRC is quite widely implemented, it is worth considering 
adding support for CRCs so that clients and servers that implement XCRC 
could easily be modified to comply with this new command.  That would 
certainly encourage acceptance.

If this was done then SHA-1 support wouldn't be mandatory. Of course 
CRCs aren't hashes so the name of the command might need to be modified 
to CHCK or something like that.

Also, in the reply, I would prefer the order to be altered so that the 
hash comes first, and also make the other fields optional, e.g.

213 f0ad929cd259957e160ea442eb8098... [filename.txt SHA-256 0-99]


Actually 99% of the time you aren't going to care about the range, and 
as you've just requested the file by name there's probably no need to 
return the filename at all.

I would consider just returning this:

213 f0ad929cd259957e160ea442eb8098 [0-99]


where the range is only returned if RANG has been used.

regards

Bruce Blackshaw
Enterprise Distributed Technologies
http://www.enterprisedt.com

On 7/04/2012 9:02 AM, Anthony Bryan wrote:
> we've updated the HASH&  RANGe drafts.
>
> any comments?
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bryan-ftpext-hash
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bryan-ftp-range
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From:<[e-mail]>
> Date: Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 4:47 PM
> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-bryan-ftpext-hash-00.txt
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail], [e-mail]
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-bryan-ftpext-hash-00.txt has been
> successfully submitted by Anthony Bryan and posted to the IETF
> repository.
>
> Filename:        draft-bryan-ftpext-hash
> Revision:        00
> Title:           File Transfer Protocol HASH Command for Cryptographic Hashes
> Creation date:   2012-04-06
> WG ID:           Individual Submission
> Number of pages: 16
>
> Abstract:
>    The File Transfer Protocol does not offer any method to verify the
>    integrity of a transferred file, nor can two files be compared
>    against each other without actually transferring them first.
>    Cryptographic hashes are a possible solution to this problem.  In the
>    past, several attempts have been made to add commands to obtain
>    checksums and hashes, however none have been formally specified,
>    leading to non-interoperability and confusion.  To solve these
>    issues, this document specifies a new FTP command to be used by
>    clients to request cryptographic hashes of files.
>
>
>
>
> The IETF Secretariat
>
>


-- 
---------------------------------
Want some help around the house?
http://www.helparoundthehouse.com.au