RE: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Thursday, November 26, 2020 03:09 +0000 Roman Danyliw
<[e-mail]> 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.

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.

thanks,
   john