IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service

Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org> Thu, 26 November 2020 14:19 UTC

Return-Path: <rdd@cert.org>
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 BDFF63A11A9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 06:19:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cert.org
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 QTe5yPOcrjDL for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 06:19:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from taper.sei.cmu.edu (taper.sei.cmu.edu [147.72.252.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8B893A11A6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 06:19:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from delp.sei.cmu.edu (delp.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.21.31]) by taper.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 0AQEJV6Y003098; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:19:31 -0500
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 taper.sei.cmu.edu 0AQEJV6Y003098
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cert.org; s=yc2bmwvrj62m; t=1606400371; bh=psF22tTo1KHKoNUVMw7yMZveSDfWr/ggZqWw/2qgDz0=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=f8wVx6F1a/z3Ed9H0E03sH1IwURSsSAaBPFGkflC8UzUaZduVQXQuo1FRyshNQUkd 7Qmro8ZwXVdqw2Kr3WfXPJzvLAcJ6nPpiGJlOK4OCTpfifE8U479GUCluBkf6k0vWH EBJ6pDxyK5mrWUpds9z+1LCmH2YV/aWJ7vZG522s=
Received: from MURIEL.ad.sei.cmu.edu (muriel.ad.sei.cmu.edu [147.72.252.47]) by delp.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 0AQEJUbw029498; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:19:30 -0500
Received: from MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu (147.72.252.46) by MURIEL.ad.sei.cmu.edu (147.72.252.47) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:19:30 -0500
Received: from MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([fe80::555b:9498:552e:d1bb]) by MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([fe80::555b:9498:552e:d1bb%13]) with mapi id 15.01.2106.002; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:19:30 -0500
From: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca>
CC: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service
Thread-Topic: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service
Thread-Index: Ada3CD1BnAYFDyoMT8WUdvX4VBiWMQIJ4c7AAOoAr4AAKdeNgAAIHD2gAA3P1oAACeuegA==
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 14:19:30 +0000
Message-ID: <ef036e20609b4388aeb07d8f5fd5caae@cert.org>
References: <af6ab231024c478bbd28bbec0f9c69c9@cert.org> <b993def4eb0140698042781e0b790af0@cert.org> <50D6883540A39384617ABEBF@PSB> <725c1a373fbc77e5@orthanc.ca> <b2b172a2d793499bb4da094f1cceb105@cert.org> <36C92F732011DE95088B8427@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <36C92F732011DE95088B8427@PSB>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.64.202.48]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/FDhwYSxK0WSV0cdwf2aZiPfMQbI>
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: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 14:19:35 -0000

Hi John!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2020 11:31 PM
> To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>; Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca>
> Cc: ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service
> 
> 
> 
> --On Thursday, November 26, 2020 03:09 +0000 Roman Danyliw
> <rdd@cert.org> wrote:
> 
> >...
> > To have as a backup, there is also
> > ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/internet-drafts against  which I-Ds
> >can be mirrored.
> 
> Roman,
> 
> I didn't know about that and, at least for me, that completely changes the
> equation.  If there is at least one IETF (or IETF LLC)-supported site that is kept
> synchronized with the IETF I-D collection and offers FTP, I don't see any strong
> reason why there needs to be access to the IETF repository on the IETF site.
> Even for those who need to change scripts, changing one site and path for
> another (either in human memory or in a
> script) should not be a big deal and, IIR, IETF has moved things around often
> enough that most FTP users have had to do that once or twice already.

Since we talked exchanged notes on being clear on positions (see: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/GXzI5CRCVLhfKzFR4s5BwKmjhio/), am I correct in interpreting that you have moved from "opposed" to "no objection contingent on continued operations of an alternative ftp source such as ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org"?

> On the other hand, if the LLC has to support, or fund AMS to support, FTP
> access to a repository on the RFC Editor site/path, it seems that the case that
> there are significant marginal costs for maintaining FTP access to the IETF
> repository just got a little more dubious.

I'm speaking for the IESG, so I (we) have no purview over contract.  With that caveat and being completely on the outside, I will repeat what was mentioned earlier that operational complexity get reduced with fewer services to run.  It also reduced attack surface (perhaps one was a little behind in updates or had a misconfiguration).

Roman



> thanks,
>    john
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email