8 ms·
Shutting down FTP services
- ryanmccullagh 10y ago1998, was so long ago. I was 8 years old! The Kernel was released the year I was born. Then, in like 2011 I first heard of Linux and downloaded Ubuntu 10.
- frik 10y agoRead the whole paragraph, the 1998 was about mounting public NFS share. Now they want to discontinue FTP. Two different things.
- loeg 10y agoThe Linux kernel was released in 1991. If you were born in 1991 you were 6 or 7 in 1998.
- sh_tinh_hair 10y agoI was working at a high school as systems/network administrator using NT 3.5/4., Novell Netware 3,4,5 and SuSE linux 5.x. Doesn't seem so long ago to me.
- frik 10y agoIMHO stupid decision. There are many mirrors, that will be affect. FTP has it's place.
- dsr_ 10y agoMirrors almost universally use rsync, not FTP.
- frik 10y agoI mean FTP mirrors, that offer an 1:1 FTP directory mirror.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- throwawayish 10y agoLiterally no one does that. rsync-over-SSH is often used for this, sometimes plain rsync, sometimes custom stuff running atop SFTP (which is a completely different thing from FTP(S)).
- Twirrim 10y agoThey're the ones that will have the logs and information and will know how the service is and isn't being used. Not you, (unless you happen to be an actual kernel.org admin?) Just because it doesn't make sense to you, does not make it stupid.
- nickpsecurity 10y agoAlmost all downloads these days are over HTTP or native apps. Probably for the better that we let FTP go. If we do a custom one, its should have benefits the popular solution doesn't have. Maybe performance (eg Tsunami, UDT) or security (stuff with TLS). Ton of solutions for availability with existing stuff so I leave it off.
- digi_owl 10y agoThe big thing we seem to be missing (likely because "everyone" is using some kind of _drive service) is uploading.
- droopybuns 10y agoThis sentence struck out to me: >>The protocol is inefficient and requires adding awkward kludges to firewalls and load-balancing daemons I have always been aware that ftp across firewalls can be wonky, but never stopped to ask why. http://www.ncftp.com/ncftpd/doc/misc/ftp_and_firewalls.html http://www.ncftp.com/ncftpd/doc/misc/ftp_and_firewalls.html >>The primary problems that the FTP poses to firewalls, NAT devices, and load-balancing devices (all of which will simply be referred to as Ârouting devices and not "routers" since gateway machines generally aren't problematic) are: >>Additional TCP/IP connections are used for data transfers; >>Data connections may be sent to random port numbers; >>Data connections may originate from the server to the client, as well as originating from the client to the server; >>Data connections destination addresses are negotiated on the fly between the client and server over the channel used for the control connection; >>The control connection is idle while the data transfer takes place on the data connection. What a protocol.
- laumars 10y agoThat's only scratching the surface; the problems with FTP are numerous. It's a horrible protocol built on kludges and it really has no purpose in the modern era of the internet. There's already numerous better transfer protocols so the sooner FTP dies the better.
- droopybuns 10y agoWhat is the most efficient? What is the most reliable for NAT traversal for all of the various implementations?
- laumars 10y agoFTP doesn't support compression, error correction nor partial transfers. So any protocol that supports some or all of the above will improve efficiency and data reliability (reliability also affects efficiency too) As for NAT traversal, p2p protocols would obviously suffer the same issues but anything with a stronger client / server relationship would fair much better. Something like SFTP is a better alternative to FTP in those instances.
- gumby 10y agoFTP may look crufty today but it was an excellent protocol for its time, and offers capabilities you can't really get with any other current protocol. Really, the problem is that NAT is a terrible idea and screws up the idea of a fully end-to-end Internet.
- laumars 10y agoFTP had been superseded by a wide range of better protocols for a good 20 years now. It doesn't offer anything that hasn't already been reinvented and improved upon in other protocols. It's about time people stopped defending FTP and let it die. After all, we wouldn't be having the same conversation about recommending telnet or rsh instead of ssh. Or teletypes over HD monitors. I'm not somebody who advocates the latest technologies for the sake of being modern (eg I still rock IRC on Irssi) but sometimes there are quantifiable good reasons for switching away from older tech.
- KirinDave 10y ago> FTP may look crufty today but it was an excellent protocol for its time, and offers capabilities you can't really get with any other current protocol. This is some weird astroturfing of the FTP protocol's goodwill, but it was never particularly good. Even for its time it's a curiously conceited protocol that is remarkably complicated without doing very much that a similarly intelligent RMI-style interface couldn't have worked with. And in practice, many FTP clients basically left the control channel concept behind and began to use it as if it were streamed RMI, opening up multiple connections for transfers to help users deal with even 1980's network environments. It stands out as complicated for its time.
- gtirloni 10y agoThis is tangencial but I don't think gumpy's comment could be considered "astroturfing". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing
- eps 10y ago> while kinda neat and convenient, offering a public NFS/CIFS server was a Pretty Bad Idea \\live.sysinternals.com\tools says Hi
- noinsight 10y agoThat's WebDAV, not CIFS. You can also access WebDAV paths with the UNC notation.
- systematical 10y agoI pretty much avoid it, even on sites that need it for wordpress you can use SFTP instead with the use of the wp sftp plugin
- bluedino 10y agoWhy can't you run FTP on a CDN?
- tinus_hn 10y agoFTP uses multiple connections that need to coordinate. It only works if these connections are from/to the same machine which is difficult to guarantee using a CDN.
- digi_owl 10y agoKinda sad, as i often fire up ftp urls when looking for tar-balls of source releases.