Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 7/12/24 04:29, Simon Josefsson wrote: > >> What does FTP offer that SSH-based Secure FTP doesn't? > > In brief (and from memory): > > - the ability to faithfully transfer files of almost any format (not > just byte streams) between machines with similar file systems > - some ability to convert between different character encodings while > transferring > - some ability to transfer files between different formats (source > file format is different than destination file format) > - the ability of a 3rd machine to mediate a transfer directly between > two other machines (widely used in broadcast TV where the files > being transferred are huge, and the machines are usually on the same > LAN) Those were marvellous inventions at the time, but I doubt these are appropriate design decisions for a file transfer protocol today. I think we've learned that data formats and conversions is a sufficiently hard problem that it is better to separate that from the file transfer protocol itself. Similar to how SSH ignores most of the data format handling weirdness of TELNET. > - "anonymous FTP" if so enabled by the server (in theory could be done > with SSH, but FTP servers generally do support this, and I'm not > aware that SSH servers do.) My preference would be to defer the anonymous use-case to http(s) rather than continuing with life support for FTP, or to try and make Secure FTP solve this use-case better. >> My perception is that most people have migrated away from ftp to http >> for the majority of use-cases (anonymous downloads), and to sftp for >> authenticated/encrypted use-cases. Rsync is also common, but not >> documented by the IETF at all. > > My impression is similar to yours. But there are still "corner cases" > in which FTP provides useful functionality that sftp does not. For > example, there are still machines with file systems that support a > wide variety of file types. Fortunately FTP will continue to live on forever for the use-case it is needed. That shouldn't necessarily mean we can't change the protocol status of it to HISTORIC. /Simon
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
