IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service

Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org> Tue, 17 November 2020 20:30 UTC

Return-Path: <rsk@gsp.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 3EB3C3A0844 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:30:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 dbYQkrIec1Rq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:30:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from taos.firemountain.net (taos.firemountain.net [207.114.3.54]) (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 A2F173A083F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:30:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gsp.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by taos.firemountain.net (8.15.1/8.14.9) with SMTP id 0AHKUc72031584 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:30:38 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:30:38 -0500
From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service
Message-ID: <20201117203038.GA30358@gsp.org>
References: <af6ab231024c478bbd28bbec0f9c69c9@cert.org> <d12d2e09-6840-0500-c14c-73d862f85c8e@network-heretics.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <d12d2e09-6840-0500-c14c-73d862f85c8e@network-heretics.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/j0vrAvb_baoo11tdET5romkRi8c>
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: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 20:30:42 -0000

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 12:00:16PM -0500, Keith Moore wrote:
> I'm very opposed to this proposal.

Likewise.

> FTP is also a very stable interface, whereas as HTTP + HTML are both
> hideously complex.???? Use of FTP as a remote file access protocol is very
> widely supported.

It is, and part of the reason for that is the stability you reference.
Scripts that work tend to keep working for a very long time.

Another reason for keeping FTP around (that I haven't seen articulated
in this thread; please forgive me if I missed it) is that having a second
or third way to access information is extremely useful when things go
very wrong.  If that happens even once over the next 20 years then the
tiny cost of keeping FTP running will be repaid in full very quickly.

---rsk

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email