Re: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Fri, 13 November 2020 18:27 UTC

Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.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 5DDE83A1018 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:27:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.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 J-aI-VyXan-6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:27:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 697EA3A1014 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:27:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8D7A5C00A8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:27:37 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:27:37 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=7lvrbrP4z1JVyv+xgvKrY0cZz6FPxi/6xWwZZXoAP lA=; b=mUmFU18Xg0M69PxL5x6G28DFaK+NRXKjBab207ECCjT/ow2SWVRcYrnGN Ya001R40yLKFmjLd0MOCc2IsAYCP9MC5DaOue2o5Pa2lVdF+L0cV1AtltoZmc0xc blpvmyqtG3DiTKFMmHGDAFkj3ABaVPbnIMuUwYdPiO3rjYKlnmzDbY1pgx+O1OMA KXPWBDRr6XCsi3RAXiOxAG1WHpmVlXXf1E99triyiP013Cb3w0sPM1+WL2IR9BD1 ddTU7E8CUUEEt6/BzYcAf6he/Y6dVk3Kamm7crTULp9ksKi0b80pTvirKZmSDNc5 vH++0CIC2AEU7OaY3TjhJSeJYowSg==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:GNCuX83TXvbae_MzA-l3mhYSJucnQ1eaJ9SwxYUqbGbmNaghTdsSeg> <xme:GNCuX3F4nGe6Zq3V2XSPrakrxZWzz9AO6ohmgeldDf1jqZSnGaeKB0xHQ-rjoS284 pzrYdYwoB5YGg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedruddvhedguddufecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtgfesth ekredttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepmfgvihhthhcuofhoohhrvgcuoehmohhorhgvsehnvght fihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhephefhuedthe efgfefgffhkeehgfeugfeiudeugeejkeefleelueeiffetfeeuudeunecukfhppedutdek rddvvddurddukedtrdduheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmh grihhlfhhrohhmpehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:GNCuX04mYa-hREKlXSPdLz0ueRlzb3cQx1kr2QunrJFMiytBXZgmWw> <xmx:GNCuX13Pki11cp-YrFFJSXprqDDrrA9y566LZGabGi97GLZisU5New> <xmx:GNCuX_Gcz1lKiQaiigkGlKAlWMWhkmr_BFa06f2NuTB5JWJibgVPeA> <xmx:GdCuX_Hy22s6bONzgyjqMcp99il7u217xFiUO6v5seRoNNuC8--IDg>
Received: from [192.168.1.85] (108-221-180-15.lightspeed.knvltn.sbcglobal.net [108.221.180.15]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3DDF63064AAA for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:27:36 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <20201113180151.AF0EE26FB007@ary.qy>
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Message-ID: <a817bcca-2a4e-3808-2b48-9f1ea9cbe7d0@network-heretics.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:27:33 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20201113180151.AF0EE26FB007@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/uWmNwWEEJGTy3G_OgQ0j8sGSow8>
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, 13 Nov 2020 18:27:39 -0000

On 11/13/20 1:01 PM, John Levine wrote:

>> rsync is not nearly as widely supported as FTP.   And while rsync works
>> okay for mirroring, I've never seen it used for remote file access.
> This makes no sense. What computers do you believe that people use in
> 2020 that support FTP but not rsync? And if that were true, why do we
> see orders of magnitude more rsync traffic than FTP?

1. rsync is not good for file access

2. traffic volume is not an indicator of importance.

Keith