On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Paul Lussier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I disagree. For anonymous file retrieval where security isn't a concern, > ftp is by far the easiest, most flexible, and most efficient protocol around. Is this really true? With the extra PORT connection I would have thought FTP was less efficient than HTTP. FTP is also not so easy with firewalls (because of the extra PORT connection). Maybe for a persistant connection with multiple downloads it is a bit better? (but this uses resources on the server end). Karl BTW, I do not believe "FTP must die". In general this is a very silly thread IMHO, and think *it* must die. ********************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter: unsubscribe gnhlug **********************************************************
- Why FTP must die in two words Tod Hagan
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Peter Cavender
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Kenneth E. Lussier
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Derek Martin
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Derek Martin
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Jeffry Smith
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words James R. Van Zandt
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Paul Lussier
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Paul Lussier
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Jeffry Smith
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Karl J. Runge
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Paul Lussier
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Jeffry Smith
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Benjamin Scott
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Derek Martin
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Jeffry Smith
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words DaveN
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Derek Martin
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Peter Cavender
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Paul Lussier
- Re: Why FTP must die in two words Benjamin Scott
