Re: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Fri, 13 November 2020 17:43 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05BBA3A0FD7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:43:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.398
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id unO4GO-OuC0e for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:43:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-f172.google.com (mail-yb1-f172.google.com [209.85.219.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D6173A0FD6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:43:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-f172.google.com with SMTP id k65so9438613ybk.5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:43:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ILOLWOi4rv79rdKvazWoRsIWm0LYYfi8Rdvy5KDADfw=; b=bR1q/UVaFttwB7h9t5i7riwuctP915WVfBVgDfqYGseLqJ3q/0jyKHGHwar7ZcvWV1 YWnC2p5HzhzKvUmqRuwKo0MkZ7KQZwtM9VrsBCfVDlZ1uQcFYhQYsZKbqq41xkep7wFX V7xvfEuDZXS+mapickSkGPCXw3xHB494LGVUiwEhYfJQb6lkk7jpRMR8bOSQ0OMsetkb wf9U9M9bXOcGmZalwiKOgCR4Ru8UtPoFLq5RmfWuJg1i44ldCM8hKx2Q77Dpr0+ODk8V 0F/90gtD4VHze+nxPwcOJY6MkmGsmJtPquCejUsuLMLFEd70rbjjMkroBMRNRpLT8i/B Cw3g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531hUPsvLoZSKwZTpnUtat3So2qWsbPFVIQ9RFy9lpVfgvedmmDU QuEAFaODCMQTp9d1jsJ6QFkEapN7qcbKzeSYDIc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwmlK51YcrHsMeO8qxj+5NOgGsE6Kj1htPrV4S/7dx+wm8BT3L12pW/62r1dyDWEQ+d/xqwzNeip8WBC1pe+Tk=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:3bd2:: with SMTP id i201mr3154804yba.172.1605289394365; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:43:14 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <af6ab231024c478bbd28bbec0f9c69c9@cert.org> <d12d2e09-6840-0500-c14c-73d862f85c8e@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <d12d2e09-6840-0500-c14c-73d862f85c8e@network-heretics.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:43:02 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMm+Lwh6TdVbQnxBcDCbrVaYCPJXUjui7Vxf1Sou=c+7AN46_w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001ceac505b400905e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/3MFeKqd0ch2QNSHK9fw7dCugc08>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 17:43:19 -0000

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 12:01 PM Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
wrote:

> I'm very opposed to this proposal.
>
> FTP is a much better interface than HTTP for scripting, mirroring, and
> remote file access (i.e. mounting an FTP server like a "share" so that it
> can be accessed from one's computer just like any other file system
>
I disagree. The ability to mount HTTP file systems is actually built into
Windows. I don't think FTP is supported.

FTP is a very peculiar protocol, I have implemented it several times and it
was awful to do even before NATs got in the way. It is not really a
separate protocol, it is an extension of Telnet.

Oh and having to redo every transfer because the default mandated by the
spec was to damage the file assuming a charset conversion was ridiculous
even for the time.

We are inventing the future here, not keeping the past alive. As usual, I
have been spending most of the two weeks between the drafts cutoff and the
IETF meeting working on my documentation tooling. Why is it that 91 people
using FTP out of over half a million is considered a serious issue? Could
we have similar concern for the people who would like to use professional
tools like Visio, Word, Powerpoint, Adobe etc to create diagrams? Right
now, there is only one tool that I know of that supports the obsolete,
deprecated, WAP-SVG required.