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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Behave WG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <ietf@ietf.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@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
