Thanks for your swift reply, even on Sunday!

Method 1

  http://ftp.company.com?user=NAME&password=PASSWD&dir=DIR&file=FILE

works! but Method 2

  ftp://username:[email protected]/DIR/FILE

did not, at least in my hands.

Anyway, i wonder whether the group on Phabricator would whitelist a domain
for use with Method 1. However, they did whitelist a Dutch scanning
company domain

  memorix.nl

it says on the GWToolset starting page list of whitelisted domains,
perhaps also behind a user/passwd lock...

Thx and best regards, hans muller
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hansmuller




Op Zo, 28 februari, 2016 7:36 pm schreef bawolff:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Hans Muller <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Update of my question:
>>
>>
>> 1. Would a ftp-domain (not http(s) protocol) like
>>
>>
>> http://ftp.company.com
>>
>>
>> be acceptable for GWToolset?
>
> http://ftp.company.com
>
>
> is an http protocol url for a server named ftp. Did you mean
> ftp://ftp.company.com ?
>
>
> http://ftp.company.com is acceptable (Since it starts with http://),
> but ftp://ftp.company.com would not be.
>
> In principle we might be able to add ftp support (It uses curl on the
> backend which supports ftp, I think its just the validation code that
> rejects ftp). We'd also need to make sure that the squid proxy supports
> ftp, (Squid in principle supports ftp, but I have no idea if its enabled
> in Wikimedia.
>
> So basically, I'd suggest filing a bug. If anyone was actually
> maintaining GWToolset it would probably get fixed. Given the current
> situation, who knows.
>
>>
>> 2. If so, would a call with user/passwd be acceptable as an upload URL
>> for GWToolset? (Of course after whitelisting the domain.)
>> Type:
>>
>>
>> http://ftp.company.com?user=...&password=...&dir=TIFF/1&file=1_01.tif
>>
>>
>
> The syntax for username and password in urls is
>
>
> ftp://username:[email protected]/TIFF/1/1_01.tiff
>
>
> This is also true for http urls when using HTTP authentication.
>
>
>> Or would .... for instance the access time be too slow for GWToolset
>> (depends of course) etc.
>>
>
> Timeouts would be the same as for http. Which are quite high, so it
> would probably be fine on that count.
>
> --
> -bawolff
>
>



_______________________________________________
Glamtools mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools

Reply via email to