...
How many protocols do we have that - at the application
layer - send
back the whole request when things don't work out? Imagine if you
were to abort an FTP upload and got a copy of the whole
file back "so
you know which one failed"!
If you used FTP as much as you use mail and if your FTP commands
could take 5 days to fail, that would not sound so silly.
In other words, I suspect you never used UUCP for copying files.
Thats the difference between you and me. I see a piece of junk
and I say, that is an obsolete piece of junk.
I used ftp for a couple of months, then I decided that the ftp
client was broken and fixed it. First you reset the stupid default
to ascii transfer from the days of EBSDIC. Then you hide all the
telnet command line layer from the user and the result is a
single command line entry called icopy.
You could use icopy in a batch file, just like the real DECNET
commands could be used.
Now ftp is bad enough, but UUCP? The only files people used to
download by mail were the sort that they now get unsolicited
by mail and this group is about stopping.
Perhaps someone would like to argue the reason why any protocol
ASRG develops should work over punchcards and paper tapes.
Phill
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg