Network Working Group A. Bhushan
Request for Comments: 414 MIT-MAC
Updates: RFC 354, RFC 385 29 November 1972
NIC: 12406
FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL (FTP) STATUS AND FURTHER COMMENTS
Bhushan [Page 1]
RFC 414 FTP Status and Further Comments November 1972
The following suggestions and additions pertain to the File Transfer Protocol as stated in NWG/RFC 354 and NWG/RFC 385. After receiving comments to this RFC, I will have the three RFC's combined into a single document and have it issued as the ARPANET Official File Transfer Protocol, very soon. It should however be noted that FTP is an open-ended protocol with room for experimentation. New commands, reply codes, data representation types, and file structures may be defined in future. If two sites agree, they can define their own experimental set of commands, data types, file structures, and/or transfer modes. Such additions to the protocol should be well documented and clearly specified so that other sites can also make use of the same.
Bhushan [Page 2]
RFC 414 FTP Status and Further Comments November 1972
4) The following response are proposed to the "STAT" and "LIST" commands (this was not clearly specified specially for the null argument case). Responses to "STAT" and "LIST" shall always be over the TELNET and Data connections, respectively. The "LIST" command with null argument should produce a list of files in user's current working or default directory. The "STAT" command with null argument should (as suggested by Wayne Hathaway) produce tha status of all file transfer parameters (user, byte, size, data type, transfer mode, and file structure) if used between file transfers (i.e. no transfer in progress). If STAT is sent during a file transfer operation (accompanied with TELNET synch), the server should respond with the status of the operation in progress. If the argument of the "LIST" and "STAT" commands is a pathname, then a list associated with that pathname should be sent.
Bhushan [Page 3]
RFC 414 FTP Status and Further Comments November 1972
8) A useful suggestion is to allow multiple user names in the "MAIL" and "MLFL" commands. Often a user wishes to send the same mail to a number of users at particular site. It would be very convenient if he can do this by doing a single transfer and command. It is strongly urged that server sites implement this option.
Bhushan [Page 4]
RFC 414 FTP Status and Further Comments November 1972
iv) The TELNET synch mechanism should be extended to other commands such as BYE and STAT in addition to ABOR.