Subject: Ftp-WG: MLST Draft Comments

From: Paul Hethmon <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 20:42:42 -0400

** Reply to note from FTPEXT Working Group <[email-masked]> Fri, 21 May 1999 17:59:45 -0400

> I'm still not sure that I understand why a wrapper that calls an external 
> 'ftpd' type of process would be able to turn 220 messages into 222 any way 
> better than it could turn them into 234 messages. 
>  
> If the response to HOST can be 220, then the 'wrapper' can simply pass the 
> control connection in as stdin/out to the 'ftpd' process. 
>  
> If the response to HOST has to be anything other than 220, then the 
> 'wrapper' must be a real wrapper, i.e. actively filtering what the ftpd 
> process sends back out. 

I guess I figured that the "wrapper" program would have to do a
bit of the connection anyway. It's got to listen for the HOST command
and then figure out which instance of the main server to start. If its
doing this, why can't it just return the 222 reply code and then
pass on the connection?

Paul

Paul Hethmon                                         [email-masked]
Inet.Mail Internet Mail Server                     http://www.hethmon.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Author "Illustrated Guide to HTTP"         http://www.manning.com/Hethmon
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Warpstock    --    Tune In! & Warp Out!    --    http://www.warpstock.org

---

From: Alun Jones <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 21:11:00 -0400

>doing this, why can't it just return the 222 reply code and then

Because the program it's passing the connection onto will be returning its
own '220' message.

Alun.
~~~~

--
Texas Imperial Software | Try WFTPD, the Windows FTP Server. Find it
1602 Harvest Moon Place | at web site http://www.wftpd.com or email
Cedar Park TX 78613     | us at [email-masked].  VISA / MC accepted.
Fax +1 (512) 378 3246   | NT based ISPs, be sure to read details of
Phone +1 (512) 378 3246 | WFTPD Pro, NT service version - $100.
*WFTPD and WFTPD Pro now available as native Alpha versions for NT*

---

From: Gregory A Lundberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 22:07:59 -0400

On Fri, 21 May 1999, Paul Hethmon wrote:

> I guess I figured that the "wrapper" program would have to do a bit of
> the connection anyway. It's got to listen for the HOST command and
> then figure out which instance of the main server to start. If its
> doing this, why can't it just return the 222 reply code and then pass
> on the connection?

As a server author, that's exactly how I was thinking of implementing it
initially.

-- 

Gregory A Lundberg              Senior Partner, VRnet Company
1441 Elmdale Drive              [email-masked]
Kettering, OH 45409-1615 USA    1-800-809-2195

---

From: Alun Jones <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 10:30:21 -0400

>As a server author, that's exactly how I was thinking of implementing it

Noted, but doesn't this mean that the presumably regular ftpd to which
you'll be passing the connection will _then_ also generate its usual 220
greeting?  That is, after all, what it would do if the wrapper were not there.

Alun.
~~~~

---

From: Gregory A Lundberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 14:05:44 -0400

On Sat, 22 May 1999, Alun Jones wrote:

> you'll be passing the connection will _then_ also generate its usual
> 220 greeting?  That is, after all, what it would do if the wrapper
> were not there.

Almost certainly.  It also means negotiated options (say, language) will
be lost in the pass-over from the HOST negotiation process to the
underlying FTP process.

--