W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > June 2011

Re: [ftpext] FWD: New Version Notification for draft-yevstifeyev-ftp-uri-scheme-03.txt

From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 22:50:22 +0200 (CEST)
To: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <evnikita2@gmail.com>
cc: "uri-review@ietf.org" <uri-review@ietf.org>, "ftpext@ietf.org" <ftpext@ietf.org>, URI <uri@w3.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1106281240030.19858@tvnag.unkk.fr>
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:

>> A new version of I-D, draft-yevstifeyev-ftp-uri-scheme-03.txt has been 
>> successfully submitted by Mykyta Yevstifeyev and posted to the IETF 
>> repository.

I'm afraid this draft is drifting even further into a territory where it 
dictates how to do FTP in a way I don't think it can or should.

Some random remarks on the -03 version:

Section 2.2

Introduced a typo on line 2, "a file a directory" should be "a file or a 

Section 2.2.3

I object to (1b) as it is present and then mentioned to be NOT RECOMMENDED and 
then it is claimed to be there due to "compatibility with some FTP clients" 
but the only times I've had to use that method it has been to overcome 
problems caused by FTP servers (or server installations at least). Its 
existance in the spec is utterly confusing to me.

(3) seems to mandate PORT or PASV to be used. This is not how many clients of 
today work - they prefer EPSV or EPRT and a lot of them also use STAT instead 
of opening a second connection. I strongly oppose to the the URI spec to 
dictate this.

Similarly, I object to (4a) and (4b) claiming that NLST should be used to list 
directories. That's entirely up to the client on how it thinks is best to get 
the contents of a directory.


  / daniel.haxx.se
Received on Tuesday, 28 June 2011 20:50:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:15 UTC