I think so. Overall, the idea is pretty cool, but too scary. You mentioned that most FTP servers support this feature, but I could find any servers highlighting this feature. The Miscrosoft IIS documentation specifically says to pick a port range that matches with the number of concurrent data transfers that you expect. Can you provide me some links to the FTP servers that support this, so I can play with those and see how they function under various circumstances?
Regards, Sai Pullabhotla On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Niklas Gustavsson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Sai Pullabhotla > <[email protected]> wrote: >> (1) would always first try to get an unused passive port. If it does, >> everything is good and works the same old way. >> (2) If (1) fails, it would try to get a port that is not shared by the >> same source/client address. If it finds such a port, it would still >> work the old way. >> (3) If (1) and (2) fail to get a port number, a 4xx error is sent to >> the client (may be after a timeout?) > > Ignoring the exact details of the current patch... how about: > 1. Find the first passive port for which the same IP is not currently > waiting to connect (doesn't matter if the client has already > connected, right) > 2. If none is found, fail with a 4xx number > > /niklas >
