On 11/25/20 11:26 AM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
For me the question is whether we need to provide multiple protocols
for making our documents available to others.
I am sure the 3GPP can fetch our RFCs also via HTTPS in 2020.
I find these handwaving arguments unhelpful in the extreme as they fail
to consider the actual issues with using HTTPS instead of FTP.
Vanilla HTTP provides no reliable way to list the documents in a
folder. (like FTP XLST or WebDAV PROPFIND)
Vanilla HTTP also provides no reliable way to distinguish a directory
from an ordinary file from a symlink, and there are symlinks in the RFC
repository.
Even if we were to support WebDAV, tor me the question is whether we
should break a stable protocol that has worked for decades and is very
widely supported in clients, in favor of something new.
Keith
(I will acknowledge the NAT issue with FTP, though I think that PASV
mode in FTP should still work. What I don't know is whether there are
ALGs or other interception proxies out there that break all FTP even
when it uses passive mode. It may be that the best feature of TLS for
this kind of retrieval of non-sensitive information, is that it thwarts
most interception proxies.)
