Subject: [ftpext] ftpbis

From: Anthony Bryan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 18:17:56 -0400

hi everybody, I posted this before in another thread but wanted to
gauge if more than two people are interested.

with inspiration from httpbis, I've been working on a collection of
FTP RFCs: 959, 1123, 2389, 2428, 2577, 3659.

the idea would be to have an updated, coherent, harmonious document of
RFCs concerning FTP along with implementation and real world info like
httpbis.

http://www.metalinker.org/test/ftp/draft-bryan-ftpbis-00.txt
http://www.metalinker.org/test/ftp/draft-bryan-ftpbis-00.html

in my completely unbiased opinion :), this is already an improvement
in that most (?) important FTP information is in one document that is
updated instead of 6-8 RFCs developed over a period of 25 years.
(reading them is like digital archaeology). the drawback is that it is
a long document, and would require more work to finish.

so far, besides collecting the RFCs and errata together, there are no
real changes to the text except where noted.
here's the changelog/TODO:

Changelog from RFC 959.

    Incorporate [RFC0959] Errata.
    Incorporate FTP specific clarifications (Sec 4.1) from [RFC1123]
“Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application and Support” into the
various sections that it updated.
    Incorporate [RFC2389] “Feature negotiation mechanism for the File
Transfer Protocol” at Section 4.1.4.
    Incorporate [RFC2428] "FTP Extensions for IPv6 and NATs" at Section 4.1.2.1.
    Incorporate [RFC2577] "FTP Security Considerations" in Section 10.
    Incorporate [RFC3659] "Extensions to FTP" Section 3 through
Section 9 in Section 4.1.5 and its Section 2 into Section 2.
    Include abstract of [RFC4217] “Securing FTP with TLS” in Section 10.2.
    Update Appendix C to include all known FTP RFCs.
    Use BCP 14/[RFC2119] key words in text from [RFC0959] sections.

TODO

    BCP 14/[RFC2119] key words incomplete.
    [RFC3659] references currently incomplete; also, [RFC3659]
internal references to section 10 (which is not included in this
draft) are not updated.
    Triage and include or reference other FTP RFCs: [RFC2228] (more
reply codes and reply type 6yz), [RFC2640], 2773?, [RFC4217].
    File recently found errata to older RFCs. Figure out if [RFC1123]
errata should be filed against itself ("Updates: 959") or to [RFC0959]
("Updated by: 1123").
    Update BNF to ABNF.
    Should we organize commands in a standard format (subsections?)
like EPRT/EPSV (Section 4.1.2.1), with separated ABNF?
    Should we update IP Address:Port description to ABNF? Or
standardize on one example: h1,h2,h3,h4,p1,p2 or A1,A2,A3,A4,a1,a2?
    Should we move the whole sentence that is Section 8 into Section 3.2?
    Should we deprecate features that are no longer common?
    Should we obsolete outdated RFCs (like 1639) with "Obsoletes:"?
    Should we use old IPR value because we're using old text?
    Are the author listing/credits in compound document done
correctly? Some are deceased or inactive or may be otherwise hard to
contact.

any strong feelings one way or the other?
-- 
(( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ http://www.metalinker.org ]
  )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads