Re: ISC will likely be shutting down FTP access to ftp.isc.org soon (https will remain)

Matthew Ernisse <matt@going-flying.com> wrote:

["Followup-To:" header set to news.software.nntp.]

Be so kind as to not direct others how to post a followup. If you didn't
want to crosspost, then you choose whether or not to do so for yourself.

Welcome to unmoderated Usenet. Everyone is responsible for his own
posts, and you're not the moderator.

news.admin.hierarchies is the key newsgroup for the purpose of this
discussion, so don't fracture the thread.

On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 22:56:19 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Dan Mahoney <dmahoney@isc.org> wrote:

Ergo, it seems to be a simple enough matter to tell people who fetch
those usenet control files via anonymous FTP to simply switch to HTTPS. 
As a benefit, this also allows us to use the CDN provider we already use
for downloads.isc.org.  The url would remain ftp.isc.org, and the pathing
would remain the same.  We'd still sync the data from Russ as we already
do).

Switching to https is not so simple. Those of us who use it regularly
want to see directory listings. I get these automatically using an ftp
client but not when I use a browser. With a browser, subdirectories are
listed but Russ's README is not (I think there are three of them).

Every single directory, then, requires a frequently regenerated
index.html file that's literally a directory listing, both files and
subdirectories.

I've been running HTTP/HTTPS servers for several decades now, including
really obscure ones embedded on microcontrollers and I can't think of a
single one -- much less one you would consider using today that doesn't
have a built-in facility to dynamically generate a directory listing at
the time of requeste.  One does not need to (re-)generate index.html
files, the server will synthetically do that if configured properly.

How are you saying anything different? The browser user needs the full
directory listing in every single directory, both files and subdirectories,
otherwise it won't function like an ftp server.

I certainly will be sad to see FTP go away, but this is unlikely to
be a persuasive argument to anyone configuring or maintaining the
HTTP/HTTPS server.

That WASN'T an argument to persuade him to retain the FTP server. He's
already decided NOT to educate those who complained about its existence.
I have no clout here.

What I hoped to persuade him to do is make sure the user with a browser
can see full directory listings.