search google.com

On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Rick Walters wrote:

> Good Suggestions, I agree that FTP is a better way to push large files.
> Problem is, I need to justify opening an anonymous access.  The idea 
> that it
> might boost performance would be a plus, but I'm having trouble finding
> comparisons.  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark A. Kruger - CFG [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 3:39 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: FTP vs HTTP
> 
> Ditto to howie - http servers and processes are also usually configured
 
> to
> "timeout" long running request in order to enhance server performance 
> and
> overall user experience.  FTP is a better choice.
> 
> Mark
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Howie Hamlin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 9:55 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: FTP vs HTTP
> 
> 
> For a file like that I would definitely use FTP - that is what FTP is 
> for.
> Most modern ftp servers and clients support resume for
> one thing (only http/1.1 supports resume and I'm not sure how many web
> clients support it).  And, although there may or may not be a
> risk using anonymous access to the ftp server it is no more or less of 
> a
> security risk when providing anonymous http access IMHO.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Howie
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick Walters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 12:37 PM
> Subject: FTP vs HTTP
> 
> 
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > I'm searching for opinions and perhaps metrics that might suggest 
> when it
> is
> > better to channel downloads using FTP vs HTTP from a single web 
> server
> > environment.  Essentially, we have a large file (35M) that a 
> significant
> > number of people must download monthly.  The question is: "What 
> advantage
> > could we gain by using an FTP link vs a HTTP link?"  Opening an 
> anonymous
> > FTP channel is potentially more risky from a security standpoint.  
> But, we
> > are wondering if channeling this traffic on another port would 
> possibly
> free
> > up port 40 and result in a performance gain for the steady flow of 
> *.cfm
> > requests.
> >
> > Anyone out there with an opinion please chime in.  Or, if you know 
> where I
> > could find more information on this topic, send me a note.  Thanks.
> >
> > Good Fortune,
> > Rick Walters
> > Webmaster, Davita Laboratory Services
> > Office: (800) 604-5227
> > Cell: (407) 491-9848
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
______________________________________________________________________
Dedicated Windows 2000 Server
  PIII 800 / 256 MB RAM / 40 GB HD / 20 GB MO/XFER
  Instant Activation · $99/Month · Free Setup
  http://www.pennyhost.com/redirect.cfm?adcode=coldfusiona
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists

Reply via email to