3 ms·
FTP fading away seems about as unlikely as SCP fading away. SCP is pretty much exactly RCP (from approximately 1980), but over an SSH channel instead of TCP soc
by formerly_proven 6y ago
FTP fading away seems about as unlikely as SCP fading away. SCP is pretty much exactly RCP (from approximately 1980), but over an SSH channel instead of TCP sockets. SCP occupies the #2 spot on the "transferring files quickly" list, #1 is tarpipes (SCP ping/pongs once per file/directory, tarpipes don't), #3 is SFTP (ping/pongs about three per file, and ping/pongs per write call, which is limited to ~256 kB).
(People say SCP is an ugly, outdated protocol, but it's actually rather nice, simple and pretty efficient, if what it does is what you need)
By the way, big point of confusion: SFTP is "POSIX-like IO via RPC over SSH" (so, in a way, a lot like NFSv3, but over SSH, and generally done from userspace), FTPS is "FTP, but over SSL".
- otterley 6y agoUnfortunately, no file transfer protocol built atop ssh (scp, sftp, etc.) can have high throughput rates over high-latency links because ssh has a small, fixed TCP window size. There are high performance forks available like HPN-SSH but they are rarely used in practice. Currently, the highest performing remote file transfer that I’m aware of for most situations is HTTPS.
- formerly_proven 6y agoTrue, and even on relatively good connections (e.g. gigabit with 10-20 ms latency) the difference between tarpipe, SCP and SFTP is quite telling.