IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: documenting rsync, or, what are we here for anyway? (was: Re: what is rsync)

Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Fri, 27 November 2020 19:37 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.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 723723A0E29 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:37:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.318
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.318 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.com
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 LOOFuTKUcot4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:36:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from server217-4.web-hosting.com (server217-4.web-hosting.com [198.54.116.98]) (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 2FA2A3A0E28 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:36:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=vo9ji+Rw1m9+AsdUyqvs/Cua/JNHLh5pXyrahOmTUBE=; b=txeSRnXOrvy7kpHz937GIZ6oV mBSm4ocuyTBDO6lX3DrvrbYjjkAbO43rD2lCYayyb644PxauLEZNpfJLq7psMBNtxjk4sl5ygZ2Vq mMWC9h2lire8qwb0gl3RJ3s8UKEsWs1lp/oMSnUtdWhdoYMg3XgwwXfinOqKALWMsnBypCP6eLKwm k+qPgUpME7c3tFxq+bdvsNzFLkqgkKu9v8cekvq+W5pZRWkb1Hj1dRLQQkC+alB50Kd0Jn3QVcjGr wvgrTW257JqjhyqYgyvvVboMgv4Vgb0eGDxPshokQHS8rJ++2RuqZ/FhntEzLSMe+2k4T3/QR86Hm btjRqJauQ==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:56224 helo=[192.168.1.14]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1kijY5-000ytd-TO; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 14:36:58 -0500
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A60DCD60-3A31-436B-BBFA-3497A7AA159C"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.20.0.2.21\))
Subject: Re: documenting rsync, or, what are we here for anyway? (was: Re: what is rsync)
From: Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <20201127184550.656B32844AF7@ary.qy>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:36:50 -0800
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Message-Id: <99E37AC2-FE81-441E-9BCF-EF549413C6E1@strayalpha.com>
References: <20201127184550.656B32844AF7@ary.qy>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.20.0.2.21)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/b3I0PlL5Rg_N1b1Vq456ce9m9xQ>
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, 27 Nov 2020 19:37:01 -0000


> On Nov 27, 2020, at 10:45 AM, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> 
> I think we have it backwards. On today's Internet, rsync is clearly a
> lot more useful than FTP. It doesn't have FTP's quaint warts (telnet
> compatibility and in-line port numbers) and is better suited for large
> disks and fast networks. The relative amount of traffic we see
> confirms this.

FWIW, although that may be true for this use case, it’s useful to keep in mind that FTP encodes a large body of experience that, in some ways, HTTP continues to try to evolve to replicate (like letting IP be the multiplexing unit and automatically avoiding HOL blocking).

FTP isn’t quaint in that regard. It remains the gold standard in many ways and has many lessons still to offer.

(Lessons; not necessarily needed operationally)

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email