1237b242fce5
dos_internet



Hello Greg - 

CA>> Not odd to me at all. I see no reason to assume those who
CA>> tend the FTP server are particularly bright. 

GM> That may be true but it is irrelevant. 

GM> As I see it, the relevant points in fact are these: 

GM> (1) that these FTP servers work well for the great majority
GM> of users of the internet, with whatever software they are
GM> using; and (2) that the writers and/or tenders of the FTP
GM> servers would almost certainly not even be aware of
GM> Arachne, and should not be expected to have made allowances
GM> for its peculiarities. 

GM> Glenn McC admits that Arachne can't work with some servers
GM> that apparently most other browsers have no trouble with. 

GM> But he claims that this is _NOT_ a fault in Arachne. Well,
GM> calling it a peculiarty, or even a feature, doesn't help me
GM> at all. 

GM> As far as I'm concerned, Arachne _IS_ faulty in this
GM> respect. 

I'm just guessing but there has been some 'tweaking' of long
established protocols lately to suit 'special needs' of OS like
Windows? I think what Glenn means is that Arachne has all that
_was_ required for FTP at the time it was written? 

Chasing ever-changing protocol requirements would require
payment of some pecunia or I'd never even consider doing it
_again_. Been there, done that. 

>
>        ,                          ,
>      o/      Charles.Angelich      \o       ,
>       __o/
>     / >          USA, MI           < \   __\__
 

___ * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/

--- Maximus/2 3.01