Subject: [BEHAVE] FTP64 draft

From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:50:34 +0200

Hi,

I did two updates of the FTP ALG for IPv6-to-IPv4 translation today.

Changes:

- added text to make stateless translation support more explicit
- covered the default port 20 case
- EPSV <argument> handling

Main question now is whether we want to make active FTP translation a  
MUST, SHOULD or MAY. It's MAY now, based on the fact that most clients  
and all servers do passive. I haven't looked extensively at clients,  
but the command line FTP that comes with Windows only supports active  
FTP. (I also need to tighten up the text a bit more.)

I would especially like to hear from Fred and Xing Li if this is  
compatible with their work.

I've also asked for comments on the apps area discussion and v6ops  
lists.

And if anyone has statistics about how common IPv6 FTP using port 20  
is that would be very useful.

As this work doesn't seem to be controversial and it's considered  
important for a NAT64 deployment, I guess if everyone is happy with  
what's there now we could try to get this out the door soon so we can  
focus on the more challenging stuff.

Iljitsch

Begin forwarded message:

> Filename:	 draft-van-beijnum-behave-ftp64
> Revision:	 02
> Title:		 An FTP Application Layer Gateway for IPv6-to-IPv4 translation
> Creation_date:	 2009-04-27
> WG ID:		 Independent Submission
> Number_of_pages: 8

> Abstract:
> The only FTP mode that works without changes through an IPv6-to-IPv4
> translator is extended passive, introduced in 1998.  However, many
> existing FTP servers don't support this mode, making it impossible to
> support the File Transfer Protocol through an IPv6-to-IPv4 translator
> without an Application Layer Gateway.  This document describes the
> behavior of such an ALG.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-van-beijnum-behave-ftp64-02.txt