RE: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service

Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org> Thu, 12 November 2020 02:57 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 06F5C3A1365 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 18:57:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.399 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 hojTwc59aQ04 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 18:57:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from veto.sei.cmu.edu (veto.sei.cmu.edu [147.72.252.17]) (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 74F1E3A1364 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 18:57:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from korb.sei.cmu.edu (korb.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.21.30]) by veto.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 0AC2vgBg009457 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 21:57:43 -0500
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 veto.sei.cmu.edu 0AC2vgBg009457
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cert.org; s=yc2bmwvrj62m; t=1605149863; bh=4vlFCNqkUgP1P6NdW2QhX4LzTGrtuuihXAplkXStWrM=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=VQyEyaDeAXY5g7W7r1MBlzTnnpLqQxIjoVDuoI7/iZjZAZncTZwD5lkshA6Y1Kxv1 OkgT9M/xLIQLk9X8YyFs8k39byU70HmjgPKQmxTWPgg1uMSR9yE6Ew1UBff14LuTai uMxjHBuMd/YKViOMPNUDgVLLPtsx1SaLtHywmyzw=
Received: from MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu (morris.ad.sei.cmu.edu [147.72.252.46]) by korb.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 0AC2vbA0008436 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 21:57:38 -0500
Received: from MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu (147.72.252.46) by MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu (147.72.252.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 21:57:37 -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; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 21:57:37 -0500
From: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
To: "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: Ada3CD1BnAYFDyoMT8WUdvX4VBiWMQBlqfLw
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 02:57:35 +0000
Message-ID: <4324ae6932e54cf7b562f3a88cda943f@cert.org>
References: <af6ab231024c478bbd28bbec0f9c69c9@cert.org>
In-Reply-To: <af6ab231024c478bbd28bbec0f9c69c9@cert.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.64.203.59]
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/bEIgcOFMA73s5BG_vZppQsUZ2eU>
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, 12 Nov 2020 02:57:46 -0000

Hi!

I've received various private inquiries for additional clarity on FTP usage and what constitutes "a small community" beyond what's already in the proposed retirement plan [1].  To that end, I pulled together a few more detailed stats.  This more detailed survey only looks at one of the periods referenced in [1] so the stats will vary a little bit (but the trends are the same).  Please excuse the lack of polish and document location as this was quick and dirty.  See:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JAXspeaMWFl8ML3hSezFSM0VsJsHI4uyDlQ2dHip8jo/edit?usp=sharing

A few summary observations:
** ~91 users of FTP (from 140 unique IPs)
** 78% of all traffic created by 5 users
** 40% of FTP users made 1 file request
** FTP is 0.2% of HTTP traffic (to documents)
** >99% of all FTP traffic is users performing bulk downloads or search engine behavior

Regards,
Roman

[1] https://www.ietf.org/media/documents/Retiring_IETF_FTP_Service.pdf

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roman Danyliw
> Sent: Monday, November 9, 2020 9:24 PM
> To: 'ietf@ietf.org' <ietf@ietf.org>
> Subject: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service
> 
> Hi!
> 
> The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is seeking community input on
> retiring the IETF FTP service (ftp://ftp.ietf.org, ftp://ops.ietf.org, ftp://ietf.org).
> A review of this service has found that FTP appears to serve a very small
> community and HTTP has become the access mechanism of choice.  Given this
> shift in community usage, reducing the operational complexity of the overall
> IETF infrastructure seems to outweigh the very limited community served with
> FTP.
> 
> In reviewing the additional impacts of such a service retirement, the
> dependencies on FTP have been assessed.  Additionally, it has been confirmed
> that all information currently reachable through FTP will continue to be
> available through other services (HTTP, RSYNC, IMAP).
> 
> In consultation with the Tools team (Robert, Glen, Henrik, Russ, and Alexey),
> Communications team (Greg), affected SDO liaisons, IAB Chair, and LLC ED, a
> proposed retirement plan was developed and is available at:
> 
> https://www.ietf.org/media/documents/Retiring_IETF_FTP_Service.pdf
> 
> The IESG appreciates any input from the community on this proposal and will
> consider all input received by December 4, 2020 (to account for the upcoming
> IETF 109 and holidays).
> 
> Regards,
> Roman
> (as the IESG Tools Liaison)