** Reply to message from "Martin A. Brown" <mabrown-lartc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on Thu, 13 Mar 2003 20:37:33 -0600 (CST)
> Hi there Dhirendra,
>
> : Okay now I put on a rule for FTP port 21 for 100Kbps. Now when I am
> : retriving data from ftp server I think the port is different when doing
> : passive ftp transfer. If I am not wrong then a new dynamic port is sent
> : by the ftp server to the client.. and then client initiates a new
> : connection on that port and then the real ftp data transfer happens.
>
> Yes. I think FTP should be summarily executed. It has been plaguing us
> since the beginnings of firewalls and NAT. Sadly, another spiritually
> impoverished but well-known operating system has two basic options for
> file transfer: HTTP ("the Internet", of course!), and FTP (for experts!).
> Of course, on the other side of the divide, people (ab)use ssh for all
> sorts of nefarious purposes....... (anybody remember a recent article in
> some print periodical detailing NFS over ssh?)
<snip>
Not trying to be argumentative or start a useless tangential thread here, but none other than Frank da Cruz provides his reason why he thinks ftp is better than ssh/scp at the following link:
http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ftpclient.html
Note he is coming at this as the developer of the most capable comm program ever.
jb
--
Jack Bowling mailto:jbinpg@xxxxxxx
Prince George, BC
