On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 06:01:13PM -0600, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote: > Colin Watson wrote: > >On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 04:39:51PM -0600, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote: > <snip> > >>Perhaps one day they'll improve upon FTP. > > > >HTTP improved upon FTP long ago. The fact that the name hasn't been > >changed doesn't affect this. > > > >(I do this for a living.) > > > >Cheers, > > Then what purpose does the continued use of FTP serve?
As far as I can tell, the continued use of FTP provides a convenient way to get root on poorly administered servers. Sadly, there seem to be a lot of those. FTP also serves as a major PITA for people trying to set up firewalls; either you have to load a module to do some magic, or you need to force users to use passive mode (and forcing users to do anything unexpected is doomed to failure). Personally, I will not run an FTP server. I've done my best to expund this philosophy at my workplaces as well :-) As Colin points out, HTTP is simply a better protocol for transferring files of any type, especially since HTTP 1.1 came into use. There is a reason apt prefers HTTP. -- Nathan Norman - Incanus Networking mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] This disclaimer is priviledged information and may not be read by anyone except the intended recipient, whoever that is. If you are not the intended recipient and have read this disclaimer, you are naughty and shan't be allowed any pudding. How can you have any pudding if you don't take your meat? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
