Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 13:55:07 -0500 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Raja Velu <raja@micronetusa.com> Cc: "'Kane Tao'" <khtao@netforge.net>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Browser-based FTP access as part of a web page Message-ID: <20020701185505.GA8295@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <004101c22129$8a62c620$1d00a8c0@www.micronetusa.com> References: <01c001c2211b$f4d79d40$8193e4ce@netforge.net> <004101c22129$8a62c620$1d00a8c0@www.micronetusa.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Jul 01), Raja Velu said: > The FTP URL actually points to the BSD Server's IP (1.2.3.4) - not to > the Windows 2000 server. So, I have not setup any forwarding rules > for that. I am failing to understand why, all of a sudden, there is > request for communication from the web browser to an arbitrary port > on the BSD server (please see the last lines on either of my logs > above). That's probably the data connection for the result of the "LIST" command. With passive mode FTP, both the control and data connections are initiated by the client. With active FTP, the server initiates data connections back to the client. I couldn't tell you why Explorer decides to use passive mode on pages with frames and active otherwise, though. Active FTP breaks servers behind simple packet filters, Passive FTP breaks clients behind simple packet filters :) For this discussion, ipfw is a simple packet filter; natd is not. You may need to open ports 49152-65535 to allow for passive incoming connections. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020701185505.GA8295>