WS-FTP Pro configured for implicit SSL running under Windows XP works
for us to connect to z/VM 4.4.
Mark
At 01:36 AM 8/9/2006, Adam Thornton wrote:
On Aug 8, 2006, at 9:32 PM, Alan Ackerman wrote:
We got Bluezone (trial copy) to work doing SSL FTP. We did NOT get
our WS
-FTP PRO client to
We got Bluezone (trial copy) to work doing SSL FTP. We did NOT get our WS
-FTP PRO client to work.
We DID open a PMR, but were told the problem is in WS-FTP PRO. That's whe
re it sits.
Of course, it may have been a totally different problem.
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006 10:35:47 -0700, Adam Thornton
On Aug 8, 2006, at 9:32 PM, Alan Ackerman wrote:
We got Bluezone (trial copy) to work doing SSL FTP. We did NOT get
our WS
-FTP PRO client to work.
We DID open a PMR, but were told the problem is in WS-FTP PRO.
That's whe
re it sits.
FWIW I have reports of success using WS-FTP Pro. Make
On Aug 4, 2006, at 9:47 AM, Alan Altmark wrote:
If no one opens a PMR, it doesn't get fixed. (Stop me if I start
repeating myself.) If no one calls it in, and the problem has been in
existence for multiple releases, then the pressure to fix it in the
next
release is non-existent. It is
Sign on my wall -
If you don't call it in, it isn't broken.
Our users get to read it often.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If no one opens a PMR, it doesn't get fixed. (Stop me if I start
repeating myself.) If no one calls it in, and the problem has been in
existence for multiple
On: Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 10:35:47AM -0700,Adam Thornton Wrote:
} This is the bit that I'm suspecting. So, let's try a different
} tactic: what FTP clients are known to do implicit SSL the *right* way
} for the VM stack? If I can get one of *those* working, then it's
} clear that the
On Aug 2, 2006, at 9:24 PM, Alan Altmark wrote:
You can either activate the FTP server command exit and sample, or use
TCPSNIFF to watch what's going on. A separate data connection is
always
used, even for passive FTP. An ephemeral port number is used.
If passive FTP is really being used,
On Aug 3, 2006, at 12:31 PM, Alan Altmark wrote:
I believe you. No errors on the TCPIP console at initialization?
Only the usual ones about gateways that don't exist because the CTCs/
IUCVs on them aren't hooked up (TCPIP2 is our experimental stack that
I can play with without worrying
So, I've set up ftpserv2, which I want to listen on port 990 of my
secondary stack, which is TCPIP2. z/VM 4.4.
In his SNAVM5 DTCPARMS file (this is on node SNAVM5, natch), I've got
:Nick.FTPSERV2 :Type.server :Class.ftp :Parms.port 990
Which seems to be what I want, according to p. 41 of
Adam,
Interesting. That little example
is wrong (and it's still wrong in the 5.2.0 doc).
See the information on the SRVRFTP CONFIG
file in the chapter on configuring the FTP server. The PORT specification
goes in there.
Regards,
Miguel Delapaz
z/VM TCP/IP Development
The IBM z/VM Operating
I am at home now, but will check my config stuff tomorrow at work and will
bundle them together and send them to you.
/Tom Kern
/301-903-2211
--- Adam Thornton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, I've set up ftpserv2, which I want to listen on port 990 of my
secondary stack, which is TCPIP2.
On Aug 2, 2006, at 5:54 PM, Thomas Kern wrote:
I am at home now, but will check my config stuff tomorrow at work
and will
bundle them together and send them to you.
Thanks
I now have things apparently working, except that when I ask for a
list of files, I never get any data, and the
That is the problem I get with most clients that claim to support implicit
FTPS. I will also check my settings for Secure_FTP client and let you know what
they are. I think I also set the secured FTP server to do a unix style list of
files.
/Tom Kern
/301-903-2211
--- Adam Thornton [EMAIL
On Wednesday, 08/02/2006 at 06:04 MST, Adam Thornton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I now have things apparently working, except that when I ask for a
list of files, I never get any data, and the connection times out.
Which is strange, since I'm sure I'm in passive mode, and so the
server should
14 matches
Mail list logo
