Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 12:14:12 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@nsu.ru> Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, cvs-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/lukemftpd - Imported sources Message-ID: <20021113201412.GB10193@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20021113111030.GA83756@regency.nsu.ru> References: <200211120642.gAC6gfg0043798@repoman.freebsd.org> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1021112090605.34156A-100000@fledge.watson.org> <20021112171203.GB59816@dragon.nuxi.com> <20021113111030.GA83756@regency.nsu.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 05:10:30PM +0600, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > AFAIC, regular ftpd is more secure and robust than lukemftpd. I've > seen reports in the past saying that performance issues in lukemftpd > are unavoidable WRT fixing them. Until we get performance and security > up to what we have in ftpd right now, IMHO it's rather meaningless to > compare features. > > FWIW, if one doesn't like stock ftpd, there are plenty in ports. Perhaps we should move this one to ports also. I am unable to call an ftpd "secure" that has no way to throttle anon users, nor control what they do. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021113201412.GB10193>