🚀 go-pugleaf

Thanks Remy for that very full and descriptive answer. You
have been exremely helpful.
Thanks again,

David

"Remy Lebeau \(TeamB\)" <no.spam@no.spam.com> wrote:
>
>"David Ayre" <davidcayre@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:44bd1d4a$1@newsgroups.borland.com...
>
>> Why is it that ftp requires so much info, such as
>> username and password
>
>Because that is the way the protocol is designed.  HTTP also has
>username/password support, but it is not used as much since HTTP is mostly
>used for publically accessible files.
>
>> and has difficulty getting through a firewall
>
>FTP uses multiple socket connections.  Data is sent on a separate connection
>than the one that is used for sending commands.  Every time a new transfer
>is started, even for directory listings, a new socket connection has to be
>established.
>
>For active transfers, that requires extra configuration inside of routers,
>and extra inbound ports to be opened in firewalls.  For passive transfers,
>that requires extra outbound ports to be opened in firewalls.  Admins don't
>like opening up ports unnecessarily.
>
>You also need to keep in mind that FTP is one of the oldest Internet
>protocols that is still commonly in use, long before firewalls and routers
>became commonly used.  The protocol was never designed to handle those newer
>scenerios very well.  There have been some standards proposals to add new
>features to FTP, but they are just patching the underlying design flaw that
>is FTP's weakness.
>
>> while http seems to be able to go straight in?
>
>HTTP does not suffer from any of the problems that FTP has.  HTTP does not
>use multiple socket connections.  And it is commonly used over standardized
>ports that routers know how to handle efficiently, and that are commonly
>open on firewalls to allow web browsers to work on company networks without
>needing extra configuration by admins.
>
>
>Gambit
>
>