Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 20:33:58 +0200 From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) To: Pieter de Goeje <pieter@degoeje.nl> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> Subject: Re: libfetch ftp patch for less latency Message-ID: <86fy7nq4q1.fsf@dwp.des.no> In-Reply-To: <86k5wzq4vx.fsf@dwp.des.no> (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8r?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?grav's?= message of "Thu, 29 Mar 2007 20:30:26 %2B0200") References: <460AE39B.4070706@root.org> <86odmcqylx.fsf@dwp.des.no> <200703291905.00192.pieter@degoeje.nl> <86k5wzq4vx.fsf@dwp.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav <des@des.no> writes: > Pieter de Goeje <pieter@degoeje.nl> writes: > > Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav <des@des.no> writes: > > > No. This is a violation of the FTP protocol. > > I'm reading rfc 959 right now, and it include examples of CWD with > > full pathname (multiple directories). Actually the rfc is kinda > > vague about this. > RFC959 does not require or guarantee that the path separator is /, nor > that "CD ../foo" does what you expect. There are also issues when the > initial CWD is not / (the document part in an FTP URL is relative to > the initial CWD, not absolute) I guess I should amend "this is a violation of the FTP protocol" to "this relies on assumptions which the FTP RFC does not allow us to make, and is a violation of RFC1738" DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86fy7nq4q1.fsf>