Not sure how wide this net is being cast but there has also been
draft-ietf-secsh-scp-sftp-ssh-uri
draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer-extensions
draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer
Tom Petch
----- Original Message -----
From: "SM" <sm(_at_)resistor(_dot_)net>
To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com>
Cc: "Behave WG" <behave(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>; <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 6:51 PM
Subject: Re: FTP to HISTORIC? RE: [BEHAVE] Can we have on NAT66 discussion?
At 08:43 14-11-2008, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
I propose that we either move FTP to historic or start a revision
effort if there is sufficient interest in continuing it as a
separate protocol from HTTP.
There are a few I-D about FTP that have been submitted:
FTP Extension Registry
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-klensin-ftp-registry-00.txt
FTP Extension for Internationalized Text
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-klensin-ftp-typeu-00.txt
Streamlined FTP Command Extensions
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-peterson-streamlined-ftp-command-exten
sions-06.txt
FTP EXTENSION ALLOWING IP FORWARDING (NATs)
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rosenau-ftp-single-port-05.txt
There were some discussion about one of the above I-Ds in Dublin.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf