diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'lib/ftp/doc/archive')
| -rw-r--r-- | lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc2428.txt | 451 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc2577.txt | 451 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc959.txt | 3933 |
3 files changed, 4835 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc2428.txt b/lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc2428.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..a6ec3535ed --- /dev/null +++ b/lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc2428.txt @@ -0,0 +1,451 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group M. Allman +Request for Comments: 2428 NASA Lewis/Sterling Software +Category: Standards Track S. Ostermann + Ohio University + C. Metz + The Inner Net + September 1998 + + + FTP Extensions for IPv6 and NATs + +Status of this Memo + + This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the + Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for + improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet + Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state + and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved. + +Abstract + + The specification for the File Transfer Protocol assumes that the + underlying network protocol uses a 32-bit network address + (specifically IP version 4). With the deployment of version 6 of the + Internet Protocol, network addresses will no longer be 32-bits. This + paper specifies extensions to FTP that will allow the protocol to + work over IPv4 and IPv6. In addition, the framework defined can + support additional network protocols in the future. + +1. Introduction + + The keywords, such as MUST and SHOULD, found in this document are + used as defined in RFC 2119 [Bra97]. + + The File Transfer Protocol [PR85] only provides the ability to + communicate information about IPv4 data connections. FTP assumes + network addresses will be 32 bits in length. However, with the + deployment of version 6 of the Internet Protocol [DH96] addresses + will no longer be 32 bits long. RFC 1639 [Pis94] specifies + extensions to FTP to enable its use over various network protocols. + Unfortunately, the mechanism can fail in a multi-protocol + environment. During the transition between IPv4 and IPv6, FTP needs + the ability to negotiate the network protocol that will be used for + data transfer. + + + +Allman, et. al. Standards Track [Page 1] + +RFC 2428 FTP Extensions for IPv6 and NATs September 1998 + + + This document provides a specification for a way that FTP can + communicate data connection endpoint information for network + protocols other than IPv4. In this specification, the FTP commands + PORT and PASV are replaced with EPRT and EPSV, respectively. This + document is organized as follows. Section 2 outlines the EPRT + command and Section 3 outlines the EPSV command. Section 4 defines + the utilization of these two new FTP commands. Section 5 briefly + presents security considerations. Finally, Section 6 provides + conclusions. + +2. The EPRT Command + + The EPRT command allows for the specification of an extended address + for the data connection. The extended address MUST consist of the + network protocol as well as the network and transport addresses. The + format of EPRT is: + + EPRT<space><d><net-prt><d><net-addr><d><tcp-port><d> + + The EPRT command keyword MUST be followed by a single space (ASCII + 32). Following the space, a delimiter character (<d>) MUST be + specified. The delimiter character MUST be one of the ASCII + characters in range 33-126 inclusive. The character "|" (ASCII 124) + is recommended unless it coincides with a character needed to encode + the network address. + + The <net-prt> argument MUST be an address family number defined by + IANA in the latest Assigned Numbers RFC (RFC 1700 [RP94] as of the + writing of this document). This number indicates the protocol to be + used (and, implicitly, the address length). This document will use + two of address family numbers from [RP94] as examples, according to + the following table: + + AF Number Protocol + --------- -------- + 1 Internet Protocol, Version 4 [Pos81a] + 2 Internet Protocol, Version 6 [DH96] + + The <net-addr> is a protocol specific string representation of the + network address. For the two address families specified above (AF + Number 1 and 2), addresses MUST be in the following format: + + AF Number Address Format Example + --------- -------------- ------- + 1 dotted decimal 132.235.1.2 + 2 IPv6 string 1080::8:800:200C:417A + representations + defined in [HD96] + + + +Allman, et. al. Standards Track [Page 2] + +RFC 2428 FTP Extensions for IPv6 and NATs September 1998 + + + The <tcp-port> argument must be the string representation of the + number of the TCP port on which the host is listening for the data + connection. + + The following are sample EPRT commands: + + EPRT |1|132.235.1.2|6275| + + EPRT |2|1080::8:800:200C:417A|5282| + + The first command specifies that the server should use IPv4 to open a + data connection to the host "132.235.1.2" on TCP port 6275. The + second command specifies that the server should use the IPv6 network + protocol and the network address "1080::8:800:200C:417A" to open a + TCP data connection on port 5282. + + Upon receipt of a valid EPRT command, the server MUST return a code + of 200 (Command OK). The standard negative error code 500 and 501 + [PR85] are sufficient to handle most errors (e.g., syntax errors) + involving the EPRT command. However, an additional error code is + needed. The response code 522 indicates that the server does not + support the requested network protocol. The interpretation of this + new error code is: + + 5yz Negative Completion + x2z Connections + xy2 Extended Port Failure - unknown network protocol + + The text portion of the response MUST indicate which network + protocols the server does support. If the network protocol is + unsupported, the format of the response string MUST be: + + <text stating that the network protocol is unsupported> \ + (prot1,prot2,...,protn) + + Both the numeric code specified above and the protocol information + between the characters '(' and ')' are intended for the software + automata receiving the response; the textual message between the + numeric code and the '(' is intended for the human user and can be + any arbitrary text, but MUST NOT include the characters '(' and ')'. + In the above case, the text SHOULD indicate that the network protocol + in the EPRT command is not supported by the server. The list of + protocols inside the parenthesis MUST be a comma separated list of + address family numbers. Two example response strings follow: + + Network protocol not supported, use (1) + + Network protocol not supported, use (1,2) + + + +Allman, et. al. Standards Track [Page 3] + +RFC 2428 FTP Extensions for IPv6 and NATs September 1998 + + +3. The EPSV Command + + The EPSV command requests that a server listen on a data port and + wait for a connection. The EPSV command takes an optional argument. + The response to this command includes only the TCP port number of the + listening connection. The format of the response, however, is + similar to the argument of the EPRT command. This allows the same + parsing routines to be used for both commands. In addition, the + format leaves a place holder for the network protocol and/or network + address, which may be needed in the EPSV response in the future. The + response code for entering passive mode using an extended address + MUST be 229. The interpretation of this code, according to [PR85] + is: + + 2yz Positive Completion + x2z Connections + xy9 Extended Passive Mode Entered + + The text returned in response to the EPSV command MUST be: + + <text indicating server is entering extended passive mode> \ + (<d><d><d><tcp-port><d>) + + The portion of the string enclosed in parentheses MUST be the exact + string needed by the EPRT command to open the data connection, as + specified above. + + The first two fields contained in the parenthesis MUST be blank. The + third field MUST be the string representation of the TCP port number + on which the server is listening for a data connection. The network + protocol used by the data connection will be the same network + protocol used by the control connection. In addition, the network + address used to establish the data connection will be the same + network address used for the control connection. An example response + string follows: + + Entering Extended Passive Mode (|||6446|) + + The standard negative error codes 500 and 501 are sufficient to + handle all errors involving the EPSV command (e.g., syntax errors). + + When the EPSV command is issued with no argument, the server will + choose the network protocol for the data connection based on the + protocol used for the control connection. However, in the case of + proxy FTP, this protocol might not be appropriate for communication + between the two servers. Therefore, the client needs to be able to + request a specific protocol. If the server returns a protocol that + is not supported by the host that will be connecting to the port, the + + + +Allman, et. al. Standards Track [Page 4] + +RFC 2428 FTP Extensions for IPv6 and NATs September 1998 + + + client MUST issue an ABOR (abort) command to allow the server to + close down the listening connection. The client can then send an + EPSV command requesting the use of a specific network protocol, as + follows: + + EPSV<space><net-prt> + + If the requested protocol is supported by the server, it SHOULD use + the protocol. If not, the server MUST return the 522 error messages + as outlined in section 2. + + Finally, the EPSV command can be used with the argument "ALL" to + inform Network Address Translators that the EPRT command (as well as + other data commands) will no longer be used. An example of this + command follows: + + EPSV<space>ALL + + Upon receipt of an EPSV ALL command, the server MUST reject all data + connection setup commands other than EPSV (i.e., EPRT, PORT, PASV, et + al.). This use of the EPSV command is further explained in section + 4. + +4. Command Usage + + For all FTP transfers where the control and data connection(s) are + being established between the same two machines, the EPSV command + MUST be used. Using the EPSV command benefits performance of + transfers that traverse firewalls or Network Address Translators + (NATs). RFC 1579 [Bel94] recommends using the passive command when + behind firewalls since firewalls do not generally allow incoming + connections (which are required when using the PORT (EPRT) command). + In addition, using EPSV as defined in this document does not require + NATs to change the network address in the traffic as it is forwarded. + The NAT would have to change the address if the EPRT command was + used. Finally, if the client issues an "EPSV ALL" command, NATs may + be able to put the connection on a "fast path" through the + translator, as the EPRT command will never be used and therefore, + translation of the data portion of the segments will never be needed. + When a client only expects to do two-way FTP transfers, it SHOULD + issue this command as soon as possible. If a client later finds that + it must do a three-way FTP transfer after issuing an EPSV ALL + command, a new FTP session MUST be started. + + + + + + + + +Allman, et. al. Standards Track [Page 5] + +RFC 2428 FTP Extensions for IPv6 and NATs September 1998 + + +5. Security Issues + + The authors do not believe that these changes to FTP introduce new + security problems. A companion Work in Progress [AO98] is a more + general discussion of FTP security issues and techniques to reduce + these security problems. + +6. Conclusions + + The extensions specified in this paper will enable FTP to operate + over a variety of network protocols. + +References + + [AO98] Allman, M., and S. Ostermann, "FTP Security + Considerations", Work in Progress. + + [Bel94] Bellovin, S., "Firewall-Friendly FTP", RFC 1579, February + 1994. + + [Bra97] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate + Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. + + [DH96] Deering, S., and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 + (IPv6) Specification", RFC 1883, December 1995. + + [HD96] Hinden, R., and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing + Architecture", RFC 2373, July 1998. + + [Pis94] Piscitello, D., "FTP Operation Over Big Address Records + (FOOBAR)", RFC 1639, June 1994. + + [Pos81a] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, September + 1981. + + [Pos81b] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7, RFC 793, + September 1981. + + [PR85] Postel, J., and J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol (FTP)", + STD 9, RFC 959, October 1985. + + [RP94] Reynolds, J., and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", STD 2, RFC + 1700, October 1994. See also: + http://www.iana.org/numbers.html + + + + + + + +Allman, et. al. Standards Track [Page 6] + +RFC 2428 FTP Extensions for IPv6 and NATs September 1998 + + +Authors' Addresses + + Mark Allman + NASA Lewis Research Center/Sterling Software + 21000 Brookpark Rd. MS 54-2 + Cleveland, OH 44135 + + Phone: (216) 433-6586 + EMail: [email protected] + http://gigahertz.lerc.nasa.gov/~mallman/ + + + Shawn Ostermann + School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science + Ohio University + 416 Morton Hall + Athens, OH 45701 + + Phone: (740) 593-1234 + EMail: [email protected] + + + Craig Metz + The Inner Net + Box 10314-1954 + Blacksburg, VA 24062-0314 + + Phone: (DSN) 754-8590 + EMail: [email protected] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Allman, et. al. Standards Track [Page 7] + +RFC 2428 FTP Extensions for IPv6 and NATs September 1998 + + +Full Copyright Statement + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved. + + This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to + others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it + or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published + and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any + kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are + included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this + document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing + the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other + Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of + developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for + copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be + followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than + English. + + The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be + revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. + + This document and the information contained herein is provided on an + "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING + TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING + BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION + HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF + MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Allman, et. al. Standards Track [Page 8] + diff --git a/lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc2577.txt b/lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc2577.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..83ba203130 --- /dev/null +++ b/lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc2577.txt @@ -0,0 +1,451 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group M. Allman +Request for Comments: 2577 NASA Glenn/Sterling Software +Category: Informational S. Ostermann + Ohio University + May 1999 + + + FTP Security Considerations + +Status of this Memo + + This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does + not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this + memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved. + +Abstract + + The specification for the File Transfer Protocol (FTP) contains a + number of mechanisms that can be used to compromise network security. + The FTP specification allows a client to instruct a server to + transfer files to a third machine. This third-party mechanism, known + as proxy FTP, causes a well known security problem. The FTP + specification also allows an unlimited number of attempts at entering + a user's password. This allows brute force "password guessing" + attacks. This document provides suggestions for system + administrators and those implementing FTP servers that will decrease + the security problems associated with FTP. + +1 Introduction + + The File Transfer Protocol specification (FTP) [PR85] provides a + mechanism that allows a client to establish an FTP control connection + and transfer a file between two FTP servers. This "proxy FTP" + mechanism can be used to decrease the amount of traffic on the + network; the client instructs one server to transfer a file to + another server, rather than transferring the file from the first + server to the client and then from the client to the second server. + This is particularly useful when the client connects to the network + using a slow link (e.g., a modem). While useful, proxy FTP provides + a security problem known as a "bounce attack" [CERT97:27]. In + addition to the bounce attack, FTP servers can be used by attackers + to guess passwords using brute force. + + + + + +Allman & Ostermann Informational [Page 1] + +RFC 2577 FTP Security Considerations May 1999 + + + This document does not contain a discussion of FTP when used in + conjunction with strong security protocols, such as IP Security. + These security concerns should be documented, however they are out of + the scope of this document. + + This paper provides information for FTP server implementers and + system administrators, as follows. Section 2 describes the FTP + "bounce attack". Section 3 provides suggestions for minimizing the + bounce attack. Section 4 provides suggestions for servers which + limit access based on network address. Section 5 provides + recommendations for limiting brute force "password guessing" by + clients. Next, section 6 provides a brief discussion of mechanisms + to improve privacy. Section 7 provides a mechanism to prevent user + identity guessing. Section 8 discusses the practice of port + stealing. Finally, section 9 provides an overview of other FTP + security issues related to software bugs rather than protocol issues. + +2 The Bounce Attack + + The version of FTP specified in the standard [PR85] provides a method + for attacking well known network servers, while making the + perpetrators difficult to track down. The attack involves sending an + FTP "PORT" command to an FTP server containing the network address + and the port number of the machine and service being attacked. At + this point, the original client can instruct the FTP server to send a + file to the service being attacked. Such a file would contain + commands relevant to the service being attacked (SMTP, NNTP, etc.). + Instructing a third party to connect to the service, rather than + connecting directly, makes tracking down the perpetrator difficult + and can circumvent network-address-based access restrictions. + + As an example, a client uploads a file containing SMTP commands to an + FTP server. Then, using an appropriate PORT command, the client + instructs the server to open a connection to a third machine's SMTP + port. Finally, the client instructs the server to transfer the + uploaded file containing SMTP commands to the third machine. This + may allow the client to forge mail on the third machine without + making a direct connection. This makes it difficult to track + attackers. + +3 Protecting Against the Bounce Attack + + The original FTP specification [PR85] assumes that data connections + will be made using the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) [Pos81]. + TCP port numbers in the range 0 - 1023 are reserved for well known + services such as mail, network news and FTP control connections + [RP94]. The FTP specification makes no restrictions on the TCP port + number used for the data connection. Therefore, using proxy FTP, + + + +Allman & Ostermann Informational [Page 2] + +RFC 2577 FTP Security Considerations May 1999 + + + clients have the ability to tell the server to attack a well known + service on any machine. + + To avoid such bounce attacks, it is suggested that servers not open + data connections to TCP ports less than 1024. If a server receives a + PORT command containing a TCP port number less than 1024, the + suggested response is 504 (defined as "Command not implemented for + that parameter" by [PR85]). Note that this still leaves non-well + known servers (those running on ports greater than 1023) vulnerable + to bounce attacks. + + Several proposals (e.g., [AOM98] and [Pis94]) provide a mechanism + that would allow data connections to be made using a transport + protocol other than TCP. Similar precautions should be taken to + protect well known services when using these protocols. + + Also note that the bounce attack generally requires that a + perpetrator be able to upload a file to an FTP server and later + download it to the service being attacked. Using proper file + protections will prevent this behavior. However, attackers can also + attack services by sending random data from a remote FTP server which + may cause problems for some services. + + Disabling the PORT command is also an option for protecting against + the bounce attack. Most file transfers can be made using only the + PASV command [Bel94]. The disadvantage of disabling the PORT command + is that one loses the ability to use proxy FTP, but proxy FTP may not + be necessary in a particular environment. + +4 Restricted Access + + For some FTP servers, it is desirable to restrict access based on + network address. For example, a server might want to restrict access + to certain files from certain places (e.g., a certain file should not + be transferred out of an organization). In such a situation, the + server should confirm that the network address of the remote hosts on + both the control connection and the data connection are within the + organization before sending a restricted file. By checking both + connections, a server is protected against the case when the control + connection is established with a trusted host and the data connection + is not. Likewise, the client should verify the IP address of the + remote host after accepting a connection on a port opened in listen + mode to verify that the connection was made by the expected server. + + Note that restricting access based on network address leaves the FTP + server vulnerable to "spoof" attacks. In a spoof attack, for + example, an attacking machine could assume the host address of + another machine inside an organization and download files that are + + + +Allman & Ostermann Informational [Page 3] + +RFC 2577 FTP Security Considerations May 1999 + + + not accessible from outside the organization. Whenever possible, + secure authentication mechanisms should be used, such as those + outlined in [HL97]. + +5 Protecting Passwords + + To minimize the risk of brute force password guessing through the FTP + server, it is suggested that servers limit the number of attempts + that can be made at sending a correct password. After a small number + of attempts (3-5), the server should close the control connection + with the client. Before closing the control connection the server + must send a return code of 421 ("Service not available, closing + control connection." [PR85]) to the client. In addition, it is + suggested that the server impose a 5 second delay before replying to + an invalid "PASS" command to diminish the efficiency of a brute force + attack. If available, mechanisms already provided by the target + operating system should be used to implement the above suggestions. + + An intruder can subvert the above mechanisms by establishing + multiple, parallel control connections to a server. To combat the + use of multiple concurrent connections, the server could either limit + the total number of control connections possible or attempt to detect + suspicious activity across sessions and refuse further connections + from the site. However, both of these mechanisms open the door to + "denial of service" attacks, in which an attacker purposely initiates + the attack to disable access by a valid user. + + Standard FTP [PR85] sends passwords in clear text using the "PASS" + command. It is suggested that FTP clients and servers use alternate + authentication mechanisms that are not subject to eavesdropping (such + as the mechanisms being developed by the IETF Common Authentication + Technology Working Group [HL97]). + +6 Privacy + + All data and control information (including passwords) is sent across + the network in unencrypted form by standard FTP [PR85]. To guarantee + the privacy of the information FTP transmits, a strong encryption + scheme should be used whenever possible. One such mechanism is + defined in [HL97]. + +7 Protecting Usernames + + Standard FTP [PR85] specifies a 530 response to the USER command when + the username is rejected. If the username is valid and a password is + required FTP returns a 331 response instead. In order to prevent a + malicious client from determining valid usernames on a server, it is + suggested that a server always return 331 to the USER command and + + + +Allman & Ostermann Informational [Page 4] + +RFC 2577 FTP Security Considerations May 1999 + + + then reject the combination of username and password for an invalid + username. + +8 Port Stealing + + Many operating systems assign dynamic port numbers in increasing + order. By making a legitimate transfer, an attacker can observe the + current port number allocated by the server and "guess" the next one + that will be used. The attacker can make a connection to this port, + thus denying another legitimate client the ability to make a + transfer. Alternatively, the attacker can steal a file meant for a + legitimate user. In addition, an attacker can insert a forged file + into a data stream thought to come from an authenticated client. + This problem can be mitigated by making FTP clients and servers use + random local port numbers for data connections, either by requesting + random ports from the operating system or using system dependent + mechanisms. + +9 Software-Base Security Problems + + The emphasis in this document is on protocol-related security issues. + There are a number of documented FTP security-related problems that + are due to poor implementation as well. Although the details of + these types of problems are beyond the scope of this document, it + should be pointed out that the following FTP features has been abused + in the past and should be treated with great care by future + implementers: + + Anonymous FTP + + Anonymous FTP refers to the ability of a client to connect to an + FTP server with minimal authentication and gain access to public + files. Security problems arise when such a user can read all + files on the system or can create files. [CERT92:09] [CERT93:06] + + Remote Command Execution + + An optional FTP extension, "SITE EXEC", allows clients to execute + arbitrary commands on the server. This feature should obviously + be implemented with great care. There are several documented + cases of the FTP "SITE EXEC" command being used to subvert server + security [CERT94:08] [CERT95:16] + + Debug Code + + Several previous security compromises related to FTP can be + attributed to software that was installed with debugging features + enabled [CERT88:01]. + + + +Allman & Ostermann Informational [Page 5] + +RFC 2577 FTP Security Considerations May 1999 + + + This document recommends that implementors of FTP servers with these + capabilities review all of the CERT advisories for attacks on these + or similar mechanisms before releasing their software. + +10 Conclusion + + Using the above suggestions can decrease the security problems + associated with FTP servers without eliminating functionality. + +11 Security Considerations + + Security issues are discussed throughout this memo. + +Acknowledgments + + We would like to thank Alex Belits, Jim Bound, William Curtin, Robert + Elz, Paul Hethmon, Alun Jones and Stephen Tihor for their helpful + comments on this paper. Also, we thank the FTPEXT WG members who + gave many useful suggestions at the Memphis IETF meeting. + +References + + [AOM98] Allman, M., Ostermann, S. and C. Metz, "FTP Extensions + for IPv6 and NATs", RFC 2428, September 1998. + + [Bel94] Bellovin. S., "Firewall-Friendly FTP", RFC 1579, February + 1994. + + [CERT88:01] CERT Advisory CA-88:01. ftpd Vulnerability. December, + 1988 ftp://info.cert.org/pub/cert_advisories/ + + [CERT92:09] CERT Advisory CA-92:09. AIX Anonymous FTP Vulnerability. + April 27, 1992. ftp://info.cert.org/pub/cert_advisories/ + + [CERT93:06] CERT Advisory CA-93:06. Wuarchive ftpd Vulnerability. + September 19,1997 + ftp://info.cert.org/pub/cert_advisories/ + + [CERT94:08] CERT Advisory CA-94:08. ftpd Vulnerabilities. September + 23, 1997. ftp://info.cert.org/pub/cert_advisories/ + + [CERT95:16] CERT Advisory CA-95:16. wu-ftpd Misconfiguration + Vulnerability. September 23, 1997 + ftp://info.cert.org/pub/cert_advisories/ + + [CERT97:27] CERT Advisory CA-97.27. FTP Bounce. January 8, 1998. + ftp://info.cert.org/pub/cert_advisories/ + + + + +Allman & Ostermann Informational [Page 6] + +RFC 2577 FTP Security Considerations May 1999 + + + [HL97] Horowitz, M. and S. Lunt, "FTP Security Extensions", RFC + 2228, October 1997. + + [Pis94] Piscitello, D., "FTP Operation Over Big Address Records + (FOOBAR), RFC 1639, June 1994. + + [Pos81] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7, RFC + 793, September 1981. + + [PR85] Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol + (FTP)", STD 9, RFC 959, October 1985. + + [RP94] Reynolds, J. and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", STD 2, + RFC 1700, October 1994. See also: + http://www.iana.org/numbers.html + +Authors' Addresses + + Mark Allman + NASA Glenn Research Center/Sterling Software + 21000 Brookpark Rd. MS 54-2 + Cleveland, OH 44135 + + EMail: [email protected] + + + Shawn Ostermann + School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science + Ohio University + 416 Morton Hall + Athens, OH 45701 + + EMail: [email protected] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Allman & Ostermann Informational [Page 7] + +RFC 2577 FTP Security Considerations May 1999 + + +Full Copyright Statement + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved. + + This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to + others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it + or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published + and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any + kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are + included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this + document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing + the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other + Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of + developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for + copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be + followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than + English. + + The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be + revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. + + This document and the information contained herein is provided on an + "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING + TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING + BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION + HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF + MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + +Acknowledgement + + Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the + Internet Society. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Allman & Ostermann Informational [Page 8] + diff --git a/lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc959.txt b/lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc959.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..5c9f11af5d --- /dev/null +++ b/lib/ftp/doc/archive/rfc959.txt @@ -0,0 +1,3933 @@ + + +Network Working Group J. Postel +Request for Comments: 959 J. Reynolds + ISI +Obsoletes RFC: 765 (IEN 149) October 1985 + + FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL (FTP) + + +Status of this Memo + + This memo is the official specification of the File Transfer + Protocol (FTP). Distribution of this memo is unlimited. + + The following new optional commands are included in this edition of + the specification: + + CDUP (Change to Parent Directory), SMNT (Structure Mount), STOU + (Store Unique), RMD (Remove Directory), MKD (Make Directory), PWD + (Print Directory), and SYST (System). + + Note that this specification is compatible with the previous edition. + +1. INTRODUCTION + + The objectives of FTP are 1) to promote sharing of files (computer + programs and/or data), 2) to encourage indirect or implicit (via + programs) use of remote computers, 3) to shield a user from + variations in file storage systems among hosts, and 4) to transfer + data reliably and efficiently. FTP, though usable directly by a user + at a terminal, is designed mainly for use by programs. + + The attempt in this specification is to satisfy the diverse needs of + users of maxi-hosts, mini-hosts, personal workstations, and TACs, + with a simple, and easily implemented protocol design. + + This paper assumes knowledge of the Transmission Control Protocol + (TCP) [2] and the Telnet Protocol [3]. These documents are contained + in the ARPA-Internet protocol handbook [1]. + +2. OVERVIEW + + In this section, the history, the terminology, and the FTP model are + discussed. The terms defined in this section are only those that + have special significance in FTP. Some of the terminology is very + specific to the FTP model; some readers may wish to turn to the + section on the FTP model while reviewing the terminology. + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 1] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 2.1. HISTORY + + FTP has had a long evolution over the years. Appendix III is a + chronological compilation of Request for Comments documents + relating to FTP. These include the first proposed file transfer + mechanisms in 1971 that were developed for implementation on hosts + at M.I.T. (RFC 114), plus comments and discussion in RFC 141. + + RFC 172 provided a user-level oriented protocol for file transfer + between host computers (including terminal IMPs). A revision of + this as RFC 265, restated FTP for additional review, while RFC 281 + suggested further changes. The use of a "Set Data Type" + transaction was proposed in RFC 294 in January 1982. + + RFC 354 obsoleted RFCs 264 and 265. The File Transfer Protocol + was now defined as a protocol for file transfer between HOSTs on + the ARPANET, with the primary function of FTP defined as + transfering files efficiently and reliably among hosts and + allowing the convenient use of remote file storage capabilities. + RFC 385 further commented on errors, emphasis points, and + additions to the protocol, while RFC 414 provided a status report + on the working server and user FTPs. RFC 430, issued in 1973, + (among other RFCs too numerous to mention) presented further + comments on FTP. Finally, an "official" FTP document was + published as RFC 454. + + By July 1973, considerable changes from the last versions of FTP + were made, but the general structure remained the same. RFC 542 + was published as a new "official" specification to reflect these + changes. However, many implementations based on the older + specification were not updated. + + In 1974, RFCs 607 and 614 continued comments on FTP. RFC 624 + proposed further design changes and minor modifications. In 1975, + RFC 686 entitled, "Leaving Well Enough Alone", discussed the + differences between all of the early and later versions of FTP. + RFC 691 presented a minor revision of RFC 686, regarding the + subject of print files. + + Motivated by the transition from the NCP to the TCP as the + underlying protocol, a phoenix was born out of all of the above + efforts in RFC 765 as the specification of FTP for use on TCP. + + This current edition of the FTP specification is intended to + correct some minor documentation errors, to improve the + explanation of some protocol features, and to add some new + optional commands. + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 2] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + In particular, the following new optional commands are included in + this edition of the specification: + + CDUP - Change to Parent Directory + + SMNT - Structure Mount + + STOU - Store Unique + + RMD - Remove Directory + + MKD - Make Directory + + PWD - Print Directory + + SYST - System + + This specification is compatible with the previous edition. A + program implemented in conformance to the previous specification + should automatically be in conformance to this specification. + + 2.2. TERMINOLOGY + + ASCII + + The ASCII character set is as defined in the ARPA-Internet + Protocol Handbook. In FTP, ASCII characters are defined to be + the lower half of an eight-bit code set (i.e., the most + significant bit is zero). + + access controls + + Access controls define users' access privileges to the use of a + system, and to the files in that system. Access controls are + necessary to prevent unauthorized or accidental use of files. + It is the prerogative of a server-FTP process to invoke access + controls. + + byte size + + There are two byte sizes of interest in FTP: the logical byte + size of the file, and the transfer byte size used for the + transmission of the data. The transfer byte size is always 8 + bits. The transfer byte size is not necessarily the byte size + in which data is to be stored in a system, nor the logical byte + size for interpretation of the structure of the data. + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 3] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + control connection + + The communication path between the USER-PI and SERVER-PI for + the exchange of commands and replies. This connection follows + the Telnet Protocol. + + data connection + + A full duplex connection over which data is transferred, in a + specified mode and type. The data transferred may be a part of + a file, an entire file or a number of files. The path may be + between a server-DTP and a user-DTP, or between two + server-DTPs. + + data port + + The passive data transfer process "listens" on the data port + for a connection from the active transfer process in order to + open the data connection. + + DTP + + The data transfer process establishes and manages the data + connection. The DTP can be passive or active. + + End-of-Line + + The end-of-line sequence defines the separation of printing + lines. The sequence is Carriage Return, followed by Line Feed. + + EOF + + The end-of-file condition that defines the end of a file being + transferred. + + EOR + + The end-of-record condition that defines the end of a record + being transferred. + + error recovery + + A procedure that allows a user to recover from certain errors + such as failure of either host system or transfer process. In + FTP, error recovery may involve restarting a file transfer at a + given checkpoint. + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 4] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + FTP commands + + A set of commands that comprise the control information flowing + from the user-FTP to the server-FTP process. + + file + + An ordered set of computer data (including programs), of + arbitrary length, uniquely identified by a pathname. + + mode + + The mode in which data is to be transferred via the data + connection. The mode defines the data format during transfer + including EOR and EOF. The transfer modes defined in FTP are + described in the Section on Transmission Modes. + + NVT + + The Network Virtual Terminal as defined in the Telnet Protocol. + + NVFS + + The Network Virtual File System. A concept which defines a + standard network file system with standard commands and + pathname conventions. + + page + + A file may be structured as a set of independent parts called + pages. FTP supports the transmission of discontinuous files as + independent indexed pages. + + pathname + + Pathname is defined to be the character string which must be + input to a file system by a user in order to identify a file. + Pathname normally contains device and/or directory names, and + file name specification. FTP does not yet specify a standard + pathname convention. Each user must follow the file naming + conventions of the file systems involved in the transfer. + + PI + + The protocol interpreter. The user and server sides of the + protocol have distinct roles implemented in a user-PI and a + server-PI. + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 5] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + record + + A sequential file may be structured as a number of contiguous + parts called records. Record structures are supported by FTP + but a file need not have record structure. + + reply + + A reply is an acknowledgment (positive or negative) sent from + server to user via the control connection in response to FTP + commands. The general form of a reply is a completion code + (including error codes) followed by a text string. The codes + are for use by programs and the text is usually intended for + human users. + + server-DTP + + The data transfer process, in its normal "active" state, + establishes the data connection with the "listening" data port. + It sets up parameters for transfer and storage, and transfers + data on command from its PI. The DTP can be placed in a + "passive" state to listen for, rather than initiate a + connection on the data port. + + server-FTP process + + A process or set of processes which perform the function of + file transfer in cooperation with a user-FTP process and, + possibly, another server. The functions consist of a protocol + interpreter (PI) and a data transfer process (DTP). + + server-PI + + The server protocol interpreter "listens" on Port L for a + connection from a user-PI and establishes a control + communication connection. It receives standard FTP commands + from the user-PI, sends replies, and governs the server-DTP. + + type + + The data representation type used for data transfer and + storage. Type implies certain transformations between the time + of data storage and data transfer. The representation types + defined in FTP are described in the Section on Establishing + Data Connections. + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 6] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + user + + A person or a process on behalf of a person wishing to obtain + file transfer service. The human user may interact directly + with a server-FTP process, but use of a user-FTP process is + preferred since the protocol design is weighted towards + automata. + + user-DTP + + The data transfer process "listens" on the data port for a + connection from a server-FTP process. If two servers are + transferring data between them, the user-DTP is inactive. + + user-FTP process + + A set of functions including a protocol interpreter, a data + transfer process and a user interface which together perform + the function of file transfer in cooperation with one or more + server-FTP processes. The user interface allows a local + language to be used in the command-reply dialogue with the + user. + + user-PI + + The user protocol interpreter initiates the control connection + from its port U to the server-FTP process, initiates FTP + commands, and governs the user-DTP if that process is part of + the file transfer. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 7] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 2.3. THE FTP MODEL + + With the above definitions in mind, the following model (shown in + Figure 1) may be diagrammed for an FTP service. + + ------------- + |/---------\| + || User || -------- + ||Interface|<--->| User | + |\----^----/| -------- + ---------- | | | + |/------\| FTP Commands |/----V----\| + ||Server|<---------------->| User || + || PI || FTP Replies || PI || + |\--^---/| |\----^----/| + | | | | | | + -------- |/--V---\| Data |/----V----\| -------- + | File |<--->|Server|<---------------->| User |<--->| File | + |System| || DTP || Connection || DTP || |System| + -------- |\------/| |\---------/| -------- + ---------- ------------- + + Server-FTP USER-FTP + + NOTES: 1. The data connection may be used in either direction. + 2. The data connection need not exist all of the time. + + Figure 1 Model for FTP Use + + In the model described in Figure 1, the user-protocol interpreter + initiates the control connection. The control connection follows + the Telnet protocol. At the initiation of the user, standard FTP + commands are generated by the user-PI and transmitted to the + server process via the control connection. (The user may + establish a direct control connection to the server-FTP, from a + TAC terminal for example, and generate standard FTP commands + independently, bypassing the user-FTP process.) Standard replies + are sent from the server-PI to the user-PI over the control + connection in response to the commands. + + The FTP commands specify the parameters for the data connection + (data port, transfer mode, representation type, and structure) and + the nature of file system operation (store, retrieve, append, + delete, etc.). The user-DTP or its designate should "listen" on + the specified data port, and the server initiate the data + connection and data transfer in accordance with the specified + parameters. It should be noted that the data port need not be in + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 8] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + the same host that initiates the FTP commands via the control + connection, but the user or the user-FTP process must ensure a + "listen" on the specified data port. It ought to also be noted + that the data connection may be used for simultaneous sending and + receiving. + + In another situation a user might wish to transfer files between + two hosts, neither of which is a local host. The user sets up + control connections to the two servers and then arranges for a + data connection between them. In this manner, control information + is passed to the user-PI but data is transferred between the + server data transfer processes. Following is a model of this + server-server interaction. + + + Control ------------ Control + ---------->| User-FTP |<----------- + | | User-PI | | + | | "C" | | + V ------------ V + -------------- -------------- + | Server-FTP | Data Connection | Server-FTP | + | "A" |<---------------------->| "B" | + -------------- Port (A) Port (B) -------------- + + + Figure 2 + + The protocol requires that the control connections be open while + data transfer is in progress. It is the responsibility of the + user to request the closing of the control connections when + finished using the FTP service, while it is the server who takes + the action. The server may abort data transfer if the control + connections are closed without command. + + The Relationship between FTP and Telnet: + + The FTP uses the Telnet protocol on the control connection. + This can be achieved in two ways: first, the user-PI or the + server-PI may implement the rules of the Telnet Protocol + directly in their own procedures; or, second, the user-PI or + the server-PI may make use of the existing Telnet module in the + system. + + Ease of implementaion, sharing code, and modular programming + argue for the second approach. Efficiency and independence + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 9] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + argue for the first approach. In practice, FTP relies on very + little of the Telnet Protocol, so the first approach does not + necessarily involve a large amount of code. + +3. DATA TRANSFER FUNCTIONS + + Files are transferred only via the data connection. The control + connection is used for the transfer of commands, which describe the + functions to be performed, and the replies to these commands (see the + Section on FTP Replies). Several commands are concerned with the + transfer of data between hosts. These data transfer commands include + the MODE command which specify how the bits of the data are to be + transmitted, and the STRUcture and TYPE commands, which are used to + define the way in which the data are to be represented. The + transmission and representation are basically independent but the + "Stream" transmission mode is dependent on the file structure + attribute and if "Compressed" transmission mode is used, the nature + of the filler byte depends on the representation type. + + 3.1. DATA REPRESENTATION AND STORAGE + + Data is transferred from a storage device in the sending host to a + storage device in the receiving host. Often it is necessary to + perform certain transformations on the data because data storage + representations in the two systems are different. For example, + NVT-ASCII has different data storage representations in different + systems. DEC TOPS-20s's generally store NVT-ASCII as five 7-bit + ASCII characters, left-justified in a 36-bit word. IBM Mainframe's + store NVT-ASCII as 8-bit EBCDIC codes. Multics stores NVT-ASCII + as four 9-bit characters in a 36-bit word. It is desirable to + convert characters into the standard NVT-ASCII representation when + transmitting text between dissimilar systems. The sending and + receiving sites would have to perform the necessary + transformations between the standard representation and their + internal representations. + + A different problem in representation arises when transmitting + binary data (not character codes) between host systems with + different word lengths. It is not always clear how the sender + should send data, and the receiver store it. For example, when + transmitting 32-bit bytes from a 32-bit word-length system to a + 36-bit word-length system, it may be desirable (for reasons of + efficiency and usefulness) to store the 32-bit bytes + right-justified in a 36-bit word in the latter system. In any + case, the user should have the option of specifying data + representation and transformation functions. It should be noted + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 10] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + that FTP provides for very limited data type representations. + Transformations desired beyond this limited capability should be + performed by the user directly. + + 3.1.1. DATA TYPES + + Data representations are handled in FTP by a user specifying a + representation type. This type may implicitly (as in ASCII or + EBCDIC) or explicitly (as in Local byte) define a byte size for + interpretation which is referred to as the "logical byte size." + Note that this has nothing to do with the byte size used for + transmission over the data connection, called the "transfer + byte size", and the two should not be confused. For example, + NVT-ASCII has a logical byte size of 8 bits. If the type is + Local byte, then the TYPE command has an obligatory second + parameter specifying the logical byte size. The transfer byte + size is always 8 bits. + + 3.1.1.1. ASCII TYPE + + This is the default type and must be accepted by all FTP + implementations. It is intended primarily for the transfer + of text files, except when both hosts would find the EBCDIC + type more convenient. + + The sender converts the data from an internal character + representation to the standard 8-bit NVT-ASCII + representation (see the Telnet specification). The receiver + will convert the data from the standard form to his own + internal form. + + In accordance with the NVT standard, the <CRLF> sequence + should be used where necessary to denote the end of a line + of text. (See the discussion of file structure at the end + of the Section on Data Representation and Storage.) + + Using the standard NVT-ASCII representation means that data + must be interpreted as 8-bit bytes. + + The Format parameter for ASCII and EBCDIC types is discussed + below. + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 11] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 3.1.1.2. EBCDIC TYPE + + This type is intended for efficient transfer between hosts + which use EBCDIC for their internal character + representation. + + For transmission, the data are represented as 8-bit EBCDIC + characters. The character code is the only difference + between the functional specifications of EBCDIC and ASCII + types. + + End-of-line (as opposed to end-of-record--see the discussion + of structure) will probably be rarely used with EBCDIC type + for purposes of denoting structure, but where it is + necessary the <NL> character should be used. + + 3.1.1.3. IMAGE TYPE + + The data are sent as contiguous bits which, for transfer, + are packed into the 8-bit transfer bytes. The receiving + site must store the data as contiguous bits. The structure + of the storage system might necessitate the padding of the + file (or of each record, for a record-structured file) to + some convenient boundary (byte, word or block). This + padding, which must be all zeros, may occur only at the end + of the file (or at the end of each record) and there must be + a way of identifying the padding bits so that they may be + stripped off if the file is retrieved. The padding + transformation should be well publicized to enable a user to + process a file at the storage site. + + Image type is intended for the efficient storage and + retrieval of files and for the transfer of binary data. It + is recommended that this type be accepted by all FTP + implementations. + + 3.1.1.4. LOCAL TYPE + + The data is transferred in logical bytes of the size + specified by the obligatory second parameter, Byte size. + The value of Byte size must be a decimal integer; there is + no default value. The logical byte size is not necessarily + the same as the transfer byte size. If there is a + difference in byte sizes, then the logical bytes should be + packed contiguously, disregarding transfer byte boundaries + and with any necessary padding at the end. + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 12] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + When the data reaches the receiving host, it will be + transformed in a manner dependent on the logical byte size + and the particular host. This transformation must be + invertible (i.e., an identical file can be retrieved if the + same parameters are used) and should be well publicized by + the FTP implementors. + + For example, a user sending 36-bit floating-point numbers to + a host with a 32-bit word could send that data as Local byte + with a logical byte size of 36. The receiving host would + then be expected to store the logical bytes so that they + could be easily manipulated; in this example putting the + 36-bit logical bytes into 64-bit double words should + suffice. + + In another example, a pair of hosts with a 36-bit word size + may send data to one another in words by using TYPE L 36. + The data would be sent in the 8-bit transmission bytes + packed so that 9 transmission bytes carried two host words. + + 3.1.1.5. FORMAT CONTROL + + The types ASCII and EBCDIC also take a second (optional) + parameter; this is to indicate what kind of vertical format + control, if any, is associated with a file. The following + data representation types are defined in FTP: + + A character file may be transferred to a host for one of + three purposes: for printing, for storage and later + retrieval, or for processing. If a file is sent for + printing, the receiving host must know how the vertical + format control is represented. In the second case, it must + be possible to store a file at a host and then retrieve it + later in exactly the same form. Finally, it should be + possible to move a file from one host to another and process + the file at the second host without undue trouble. A single + ASCII or EBCDIC format does not satisfy all these + conditions. Therefore, these types have a second parameter + specifying one of the following three formats: + + 3.1.1.5.1. NON PRINT + + This is the default format to be used if the second + (format) parameter is omitted. Non-print format must be + accepted by all FTP implementations. + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 13] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + The file need contain no vertical format information. If + it is passed to a printer process, this process may + assume standard values for spacing and margins. + + Normally, this format will be used with files destined + for processing or just storage. + + 3.1.1.5.2. TELNET FORMAT CONTROLS + + The file contains ASCII/EBCDIC vertical format controls + (i.e., <CR>, <LF>, <NL>, <VT>, <FF>) which the printer + process will interpret appropriately. <CRLF>, in exactly + this sequence, also denotes end-of-line. + + 3.1.1.5.2. CARRIAGE CONTROL (ASA) + + The file contains ASA (FORTRAN) vertical format control + characters. (See RFC 740 Appendix C; and Communications + of the ACM, Vol. 7, No. 10, p. 606, October 1964.) In a + line or a record formatted according to the ASA Standard, + the first character is not to be printed. Instead, it + should be used to determine the vertical movement of the + paper which should take place before the rest of the + record is printed. + + The ASA Standard specifies the following control + characters: + + Character Vertical Spacing + + blank Move paper up one line + 0 Move paper up two lines + 1 Move paper to top of next page + + No movement, i.e., overprint + + Clearly there must be some way for a printer process to + distinguish the end of the structural entity. If a file + has record structure (see below) this is no problem; + records will be explicitly marked during transfer and + storage. If the file has no record structure, the <CRLF> + end-of-line sequence is used to separate printing lines, + but these format effectors are overridden by the ASA + controls. + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 14] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 3.1.2. DATA STRUCTURES + + In addition to different representation types, FTP allows the + structure of a file to be specified. Three file structures are + defined in FTP: + + file-structure, where there is no internal structure and + the file is considered to be a + continuous sequence of data bytes, + + record-structure, where the file is made up of sequential + records, + + and page-structure, where the file is made up of independent + indexed pages. + + File-structure is the default to be assumed if the STRUcture + command has not been used but both file and record structures + must be accepted for "text" files (i.e., files with TYPE ASCII + or EBCDIC) by all FTP implementations. The structure of a file + will affect both the transfer mode of a file (see the Section + on Transmission Modes) and the interpretation and storage of + the file. + + The "natural" structure of a file will depend on which host + stores the file. A source-code file will usually be stored on + an IBM Mainframe in fixed length records but on a DEC TOPS-20 + as a stream of characters partitioned into lines, for example + by <CRLF>. If the transfer of files between such disparate + sites is to be useful, there must be some way for one site to + recognize the other's assumptions about the file. + + With some sites being naturally file-oriented and others + naturally record-oriented there may be problems if a file with + one structure is sent to a host oriented to the other. If a + text file is sent with record-structure to a host which is file + oriented, then that host should apply an internal + transformation to the file based on the record structure. + Obviously, this transformation should be useful, but it must + also be invertible so that an identical file may be retrieved + using record structure. + + In the case of a file being sent with file-structure to a + record-oriented host, there exists the question of what + criteria the host should use to divide the file into records + which can be processed locally. If this division is necessary, + the FTP implementation should use the end-of-line sequence, + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 15] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + <CRLF> for ASCII, or <NL> for EBCDIC text files, as the + delimiter. If an FTP implementation adopts this technique, it + must be prepared to reverse the transformation if the file is + retrieved with file-structure. + + 3.1.2.1. FILE STRUCTURE + + File structure is the default to be assumed if the STRUcture + command has not been used. + + In file-structure there is no internal structure and the + file is considered to be a continuous sequence of data + bytes. + + 3.1.2.2. RECORD STRUCTURE + + Record structures must be accepted for "text" files (i.e., + files with TYPE ASCII or EBCDIC) by all FTP implementations. + + In record-structure the file is made up of sequential + records. + + 3.1.2.3. PAGE STRUCTURE + + To transmit files that are discontinuous, FTP defines a page + structure. Files of this type are sometimes known as + "random access files" or even as "holey files". In these + files there is sometimes other information associated with + the file as a whole (e.g., a file descriptor), or with a + section of the file (e.g., page access controls), or both. + In FTP, the sections of the file are called pages. + + To provide for various page sizes and associated + information, each page is sent with a page header. The page + header has the following defined fields: + + Header Length + + The number of logical bytes in the page header + including this byte. The minimum header length is 4. + + Page Index + + The logical page number of this section of the file. + This is not the transmission sequence number of this + page, but the index used to identify this page of the + file. + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 16] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + Data Length + + The number of logical bytes in the page data. The + minimum data length is 0. + + Page Type + + The type of page this is. The following page types + are defined: + + 0 = Last Page + + This is used to indicate the end of a paged + structured transmission. The header length must + be 4, and the data length must be 0. + + 1 = Simple Page + + This is the normal type for simple paged files + with no page level associated control + information. The header length must be 4. + + 2 = Descriptor Page + + This type is used to transmit the descriptive + information for the file as a whole. + + 3 = Access Controlled Page + + This type includes an additional header field + for paged files with page level access control + information. The header length must be 5. + + Optional Fields + + Further header fields may be used to supply per page + control information, for example, per page access + control. + + All fields are one logical byte in length. The logical byte + size is specified by the TYPE command. See Appendix I for + further details and a specific case at the page structure. + + A note of caution about parameters: a file must be stored and + retrieved with the same parameters if the retrieved version is to + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 17] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + be identical to the version originally transmitted. Conversely, + FTP implementations must return a file identical to the original + if the parameters used to store and retrieve a file are the same. + + 3.2. ESTABLISHING DATA CONNECTIONS + + The mechanics of transferring data consists of setting up the data + connection to the appropriate ports and choosing the parameters + for transfer. Both the user and the server-DTPs have a default + data port. The user-process default data port is the same as the + control connection port (i.e., U). The server-process default + data port is the port adjacent to the control connection port + (i.e., L-1). + + The transfer byte size is 8-bit bytes. This byte size is relevant + only for the actual transfer of the data; it has no bearing on + representation of the data within a host's file system. + + The passive data transfer process (this may be a user-DTP or a + second server-DTP) shall "listen" on the data port prior to + sending a transfer request command. The FTP request command + determines the direction of the data transfer. The server, upon + receiving the transfer request, will initiate the data connection + to the port. When the connection is established, the data + transfer begins between DTP's, and the server-PI sends a + confirming reply to the user-PI. + + Every FTP implementation must support the use of the default data + ports, and only the USER-PI can initiate a change to non-default + ports. + + It is possible for the user to specify an alternate data port by + use of the PORT command. The user may want a file dumped on a TAC + line printer or retrieved from a third party host. In the latter + case, the user-PI sets up control connections with both + server-PI's. One server is then told (by an FTP command) to + "listen" for a connection which the other will initiate. The + user-PI sends one server-PI a PORT command indicating the data + port of the other. Finally, both are sent the appropriate + transfer commands. The exact sequence of commands and replies + sent between the user-controller and the servers is defined in the + Section on FTP Replies. + + In general, it is the server's responsibility to maintain the data + connection--to initiate it and to close it. The exception to this + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 18] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + is when the user-DTP is sending the data in a transfer mode that + requires the connection to be closed to indicate EOF. The server + MUST close the data connection under the following conditions: + + 1. The server has completed sending data in a transfer mode + that requires a close to indicate EOF. + + 2. The server receives an ABORT command from the user. + + 3. The port specification is changed by a command from the + user. + + 4. The control connection is closed legally or otherwise. + + 5. An irrecoverable error condition occurs. + + Otherwise the close is a server option, the exercise of which the + server must indicate to the user-process by either a 250 or 226 + reply only. + + 3.3. DATA CONNECTION MANAGEMENT + + Default Data Connection Ports: All FTP implementations must + support use of the default data connection ports, and only the + User-PI may initiate the use of non-default ports. + + Negotiating Non-Default Data Ports: The User-PI may specify a + non-default user side data port with the PORT command. The + User-PI may request the server side to identify a non-default + server side data port with the PASV command. Since a connection + is defined by the pair of addresses, either of these actions is + enough to get a different data connection, still it is permitted + to do both commands to use new ports on both ends of the data + connection. + + Reuse of the Data Connection: When using the stream mode of data + transfer the end of the file must be indicated by closing the + connection. This causes a problem if multiple files are to be + transfered in the session, due to need for TCP to hold the + connection record for a time out period to guarantee the reliable + communication. Thus the connection can not be reopened at once. + + There are two solutions to this problem. The first is to + negotiate a non-default port. The second is to use another + transfer mode. + + A comment on transfer modes. The stream transfer mode is + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 19] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + inherently unreliable, since one can not determine if the + connection closed prematurely or not. The other transfer modes + (Block, Compressed) do not close the connection to indicate the + end of file. They have enough FTP encoding that the data + connection can be parsed to determine the end of the file. + Thus using these modes one can leave the data connection open + for multiple file transfers. + + 3.4. TRANSMISSION MODES + + The next consideration in transferring data is choosing the + appropriate transmission mode. There are three modes: one which + formats the data and allows for restart procedures; one which also + compresses the data for efficient transfer; and one which passes + the data with little or no processing. In this last case the mode + interacts with the structure attribute to determine the type of + processing. In the compressed mode, the representation type + determines the filler byte. + + All data transfers must be completed with an end-of-file (EOF) + which may be explicitly stated or implied by the closing of the + data connection. For files with record structure, all the + end-of-record markers (EOR) are explicit, including the final one. + For files transmitted in page structure a "last-page" page type is + used. + + NOTE: In the rest of this section, byte means "transfer byte" + except where explicitly stated otherwise. + + For the purpose of standardized transfer, the sending host will + translate its internal end of line or end of record denotation + into the representation prescribed by the transfer mode and file + structure, and the receiving host will perform the inverse + translation to its internal denotation. An IBM Mainframe record + count field may not be recognized at another host, so the + end-of-record information may be transferred as a two byte control + code in Stream mode or as a flagged bit in a Block or Compressed + mode descriptor. End-of-line in an ASCII or EBCDIC file with no + record structure should be indicated by <CRLF> or <NL>, + respectively. Since these transformations imply extra work for + some systems, identical systems transferring non-record structured + text files might wish to use a binary representation and stream + mode for the transfer. + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 20] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + The following transmission modes are defined in FTP: + + 3.4.1. STREAM MODE + + The data is transmitted as a stream of bytes. There is no + restriction on the representation type used; record structures + are allowed. + + In a record structured file EOR and EOF will each be indicated + by a two-byte control code. The first byte of the control code + will be all ones, the escape character. The second byte will + have the low order bit on and zeros elsewhere for EOR and the + second low order bit on for EOF; that is, the byte will have + value 1 for EOR and value 2 for EOF. EOR and EOF may be + indicated together on the last byte transmitted by turning both + low order bits on (i.e., the value 3). If a byte of all ones + was intended to be sent as data, it should be repeated in the + second byte of the control code. + + If the structure is a file structure, the EOF is indicated by + the sending host closing the data connection and all bytes are + data bytes. + + 3.4.2. BLOCK MODE + + The file is transmitted as a series of data blocks preceded by + one or more header bytes. The header bytes contain a count + field, and descriptor code. The count field indicates the + total length of the data block in bytes, thus marking the + beginning of the next data block (there are no filler bits). + The descriptor code defines: last block in the file (EOF) last + block in the record (EOR), restart marker (see the Section on + Error Recovery and Restart) or suspect data (i.e., the data + being transferred is suspected of errors and is not reliable). + This last code is NOT intended for error control within FTP. + It is motivated by the desire of sites exchanging certain types + of data (e.g., seismic or weather data) to send and receive all + the data despite local errors (such as "magnetic tape read + errors"), but to indicate in the transmission that certain + portions are suspect). Record structures are allowed in this + mode, and any representation type may be used. + + The header consists of the three bytes. Of the 24 bits of + header information, the 16 low order bits shall represent byte + count, and the 8 high order bits shall represent descriptor + codes as shown below. + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 21] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + Block Header + + +----------------+----------------+----------------+ + | Descriptor | Byte Count | + | 8 bits | 16 bits | + +----------------+----------------+----------------+ + + + The descriptor codes are indicated by bit flags in the + descriptor byte. Four codes have been assigned, where each + code number is the decimal value of the corresponding bit in + the byte. + + Code Meaning + + 128 End of data block is EOR + 64 End of data block is EOF + 32 Suspected errors in data block + 16 Data block is a restart marker + + With this encoding, more than one descriptor coded condition + may exist for a particular block. As many bits as necessary + may be flagged. + + The restart marker is embedded in the data stream as an + integral number of 8-bit bytes representing printable + characters in the language being used over the control + connection (e.g., default--NVT-ASCII). <SP> (Space, in the + appropriate language) must not be used WITHIN a restart marker. + + For example, to transmit a six-character marker, the following + would be sent: + + +--------+--------+--------+ + |Descrptr| Byte count | + |code= 16| = 6 | + +--------+--------+--------+ + + +--------+--------+--------+ + | Marker | Marker | Marker | + | 8 bits | 8 bits | 8 bits | + +--------+--------+--------+ + + +--------+--------+--------+ + | Marker | Marker | Marker | + | 8 bits | 8 bits | 8 bits | + +--------+--------+--------+ + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 22] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 3.4.3. COMPRESSED MODE + + There are three kinds of information to be sent: regular data, + sent in a byte string; compressed data, consisting of + replications or filler; and control information, sent in a + two-byte escape sequence. If n>0 bytes (up to 127) of regular + data are sent, these n bytes are preceded by a byte with the + left-most bit set to 0 and the right-most 7 bits containing the + number n. + + Byte string: + + 1 7 8 8 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + |0| n | | d(1) | ... | d(n) | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + ^ ^ + |---n bytes---| + of data + + String of n data bytes d(1),..., d(n) + Count n must be positive. + + To compress a string of n replications of the data byte d, the + following 2 bytes are sent: + + Replicated Byte: + + 2 6 8 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + |1 0| n | | d | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + A string of n filler bytes can be compressed into a single + byte, where the filler byte varies with the representation + type. If the type is ASCII or EBCDIC the filler byte is <SP> + (Space, ASCII code 32, EBCDIC code 64). If the type is Image + or Local byte the filler is a zero byte. + + Filler String: + + 2 6 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + |1 1| n | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + The escape sequence is a double byte, the first of which is the + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 23] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + escape byte (all zeros) and the second of which contains + descriptor codes as defined in Block mode. The descriptor + codes have the same meaning as in Block mode and apply to the + succeeding string of bytes. + + Compressed mode is useful for obtaining increased bandwidth on + very large network transmissions at a little extra CPU cost. + It can be most effectively used to reduce the size of printer + files such as those generated by RJE hosts. + + 3.5. ERROR RECOVERY AND RESTART + + There is no provision for detecting bits lost or scrambled in data + transfer; this level of error control is handled by the TCP. + However, a restart procedure is provided to protect users from + gross system failures (including failures of a host, an + FTP-process, or the underlying network). + + The restart procedure is defined only for the block and compressed + modes of data transfer. It requires the sender of data to insert + a special marker code in the data stream with some marker + information. The marker information has meaning only to the + sender, but must consist of printable characters in the default or + negotiated language of the control connection (ASCII or EBCDIC). + The marker could represent a bit-count, a record-count, or any + other information by which a system may identify a data + checkpoint. The receiver of data, if it implements the restart + procedure, would then mark the corresponding position of this + marker in the receiving system, and return this information to the + user. + + In the event of a system failure, the user can restart the data + transfer by identifying the marker point with the FTP restart + procedure. The following example illustrates the use of the + restart procedure. + + The sender of the data inserts an appropriate marker block in the + data stream at a convenient point. The receiving host marks the + corresponding data point in its file system and conveys the last + known sender and receiver marker information to the user, either + directly or over the control connection in a 110 reply (depending + on who is the sender). In the event of a system failure, the user + or controller process restarts the server at the last server + marker by sending a restart command with server's marker code as + its argument. The restart command is transmitted over the control + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 24] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + connection and is immediately followed by the command (such as + RETR, STOR or LIST) which was being executed when the system + failure occurred. + +4. FILE TRANSFER FUNCTIONS + + The communication channel from the user-PI to the server-PI is + established as a TCP connection from the user to the standard server + port. The user protocol interpreter is responsible for sending FTP + commands and interpreting the replies received; the server-PI + interprets commands, sends replies and directs its DTP to set up the + data connection and transfer the data. If the second party to the + data transfer (the passive transfer process) is the user-DTP, then it + is governed through the internal protocol of the user-FTP host; if it + is a second server-DTP, then it is governed by its PI on command from + the user-PI. The FTP replies are discussed in the next section. In + the description of a few of the commands in this section, it is + helpful to be explicit about the possible replies. + + 4.1. FTP COMMANDS + + 4.1.1. ACCESS CONTROL COMMANDS + + The following commands specify access control identifiers + (command codes are shown in parentheses). + + USER NAME (USER) + + The argument field is a Telnet string identifying the user. + The user identification is that which is required by the + server for access to its file system. This command will + normally be the first command transmitted by the user after + the control connections are made (some servers may require + this). Additional identification information in the form of + a password and/or an account command may also be required by + some servers. Servers may allow a new USER command to be + entered at any point in order to change the access control + and/or accounting information. This has the effect of + flushing any user, password, and account information already + supplied and beginning the login sequence again. All + transfer parameters are unchanged and any file transfer in + progress is completed under the old access control + parameters. + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 25] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + PASSWORD (PASS) + + The argument field is a Telnet string specifying the user's + password. This command must be immediately preceded by the + user name command, and, for some sites, completes the user's + identification for access control. Since password + information is quite sensitive, it is desirable in general + to "mask" it or suppress typeout. It appears that the + server has no foolproof way to achieve this. It is + therefore the responsibility of the user-FTP process to hide + the sensitive password information. + + ACCOUNT (ACCT) + + The argument field is a Telnet string identifying the user's + account. The command is not necessarily related to the USER + command, as some sites may require an account for login and + others only for specific access, such as storing files. In + the latter case the command may arrive at any time. + + There are reply codes to differentiate these cases for the + automation: when account information is required for login, + the response to a successful PASSword command is reply code + 332. On the other hand, if account information is NOT + required for login, the reply to a successful PASSword + command is 230; and if the account information is needed for + a command issued later in the dialogue, the server should + return a 332 or 532 reply depending on whether it stores + (pending receipt of the ACCounT command) or discards the + command, respectively. + + CHANGE WORKING DIRECTORY (CWD) + + This command allows the user to work with a different + directory or dataset for file storage or retrieval without + altering his login or accounting information. Transfer + parameters are similarly unchanged. The argument is a + pathname specifying a directory or other system dependent + file group designator. + + CHANGE TO PARENT DIRECTORY (CDUP) + + This command is a special case of CWD, and is included to + simplify the implementation of programs for transferring + directory trees between operating systems having different + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 26] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + syntaxes for naming the parent directory. The reply codes + shall be identical to the reply codes of CWD. See + Appendix II for further details. + + STRUCTURE MOUNT (SMNT) + + This command allows the user to mount a different file + system data structure without altering his login or + accounting information. Transfer parameters are similarly + unchanged. The argument is a pathname specifying a + directory or other system dependent file group designator. + + REINITIALIZE (REIN) + + This command terminates a USER, flushing all I/O and account + information, except to allow any transfer in progress to be + completed. All parameters are reset to the default settings + and the control connection is left open. This is identical + to the state in which a user finds himself immediately after + the control connection is opened. A USER command may be + expected to follow. + + LOGOUT (QUIT) + + This command terminates a USER and if file transfer is not + in progress, the server closes the control connection. If + file transfer is in progress, the connection will remain + open for result response and the server will then close it. + If the user-process is transferring files for several USERs + but does not wish to close and then reopen connections for + each, then the REIN command should be used instead of QUIT. + + An unexpected close on the control connection will cause the + server to take the effective action of an abort (ABOR) and a + logout (QUIT). + + 4.1.2. TRANSFER PARAMETER COMMANDS + + All data transfer parameters have default values, and the + commands specifying data transfer parameters are required only + if the default parameter values are to be changed. The default + value is the last specified value, or if no value has been + specified, the standard default value is as stated here. This + implies that the server must "remember" the applicable default + values. The commands may be in any order except that they must + precede the FTP service request. The following commands + specify data transfer parameters: + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 27] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + DATA PORT (PORT) + + The argument is a HOST-PORT specification for the data port + to be used in data connection. There are defaults for both + the user and server data ports, and under normal + circumstances this command and its reply are not needed. If + this command is used, the argument is the concatenation of a + 32-bit internet host address and a 16-bit TCP port address. + This address information is broken into 8-bit fields and the + value of each field is transmitted as a decimal number (in + character string representation). The fields are separated + by commas. A port command would be: + + PORT h1,h2,h3,h4,p1,p2 + + where h1 is the high order 8 bits of the internet host + address. + + PASSIVE (PASV) + + This command requests the server-DTP to "listen" on a data + port (which is not its default data port) and to wait for a + connection rather than initiate one upon receipt of a + transfer command. The response to this command includes the + host and port address this server is listening on. + + REPRESENTATION TYPE (TYPE) + + The argument specifies the representation type as described + in the Section on Data Representation and Storage. Several + types take a second parameter. The first parameter is + denoted by a single Telnet character, as is the second + Format parameter for ASCII and EBCDIC; the second parameter + for local byte is a decimal integer to indicate Bytesize. + The parameters are separated by a <SP> (Space, ASCII code + 32). + + The following codes are assigned for type: + + \ / + A - ASCII | | N - Non-print + |-><-| T - Telnet format effectors + E - EBCDIC| | C - Carriage Control (ASA) + / \ + I - Image + + L <byte size> - Local byte Byte size + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 28] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + The default representation type is ASCII Non-print. If the + Format parameter is changed, and later just the first + argument is changed, Format then returns to the Non-print + default. + + FILE STRUCTURE (STRU) + + The argument is a single Telnet character code specifying + file structure described in the Section on Data + Representation and Storage. + + The following codes are assigned for structure: + + F - File (no record structure) + R - Record structure + P - Page structure + + The default structure is File. + + TRANSFER MODE (MODE) + + The argument is a single Telnet character code specifying + the data transfer modes described in the Section on + Transmission Modes. + + The following codes are assigned for transfer modes: + + S - Stream + B - Block + C - Compressed + + The default transfer mode is Stream. + + 4.1.3. FTP SERVICE COMMANDS + + The FTP service commands define the file transfer or the file + system function requested by the user. The argument of an FTP + service command will normally be a pathname. The syntax of + pathnames must conform to server site conventions (with + standard defaults applicable), and the language conventions of + the control connection. The suggested default handling is to + use the last specified device, directory or file name, or the + standard default defined for local users. The commands may be + in any order except that a "rename from" command must be + followed by a "rename to" command and the restart command must + be followed by the interrupted service command (e.g., STOR or + RETR). The data, when transferred in response to FTP service + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 29] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + commands, shall always be sent over the data connection, except + for certain informative replies. The following commands + specify FTP service requests: + + RETRIEVE (RETR) + + This command causes the server-DTP to transfer a copy of the + file, specified in the pathname, to the server- or user-DTP + at the other end of the data connection. The status and + contents of the file at the server site shall be unaffected. + + STORE (STOR) + + This command causes the server-DTP to accept the data + transferred via the data connection and to store the data as + a file at the server site. If the file specified in the + pathname exists at the server site, then its contents shall + be replaced by the data being transferred. A new file is + created at the server site if the file specified in the + pathname does not already exist. + + STORE UNIQUE (STOU) + + This command behaves like STOR except that the resultant + file is to be created in the current directory under a name + unique to that directory. The 250 Transfer Started response + must include the name generated. + + APPEND (with create) (APPE) + + This command causes the server-DTP to accept the data + transferred via the data connection and to store the data in + a file at the server site. If the file specified in the + pathname exists at the server site, then the data shall be + appended to that file; otherwise the file specified in the + pathname shall be created at the server site. + + ALLOCATE (ALLO) + + This command may be required by some servers to reserve + sufficient storage to accommodate the new file to be + transferred. The argument shall be a decimal integer + representing the number of bytes (using the logical byte + size) of storage to be reserved for the file. For files + sent with record or page structure a maximum record or page + size (in logical bytes) might also be necessary; this is + indicated by a decimal integer in a second argument field of + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 30] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + the command. This second argument is optional, but when + present should be separated from the first by the three + Telnet characters <SP> R <SP>. This command shall be + followed by a STORe or APPEnd command. The ALLO command + should be treated as a NOOP (no operation) by those servers + which do not require that the maximum size of the file be + declared beforehand, and those servers interested in only + the maximum record or page size should accept a dummy value + in the first argument and ignore it. + + RESTART (REST) + + The argument field represents the server marker at which + file transfer is to be restarted. This command does not + cause file transfer but skips over the file to the specified + data checkpoint. This command shall be immediately followed + by the appropriate FTP service command which shall cause + file transfer to resume. + + RENAME FROM (RNFR) + + This command specifies the old pathname of the file which is + to be renamed. This command must be immediately followed by + a "rename to" command specifying the new file pathname. + + RENAME TO (RNTO) + + This command specifies the new pathname of the file + specified in the immediately preceding "rename from" + command. Together the two commands cause a file to be + renamed. + + ABORT (ABOR) + + This command tells the server to abort the previous FTP + service command and any associated transfer of data. The + abort command may require "special action", as discussed in + the Section on FTP Commands, to force recognition by the + server. No action is to be taken if the previous command + has been completed (including data transfer). The control + connection is not to be closed by the server, but the data + connection must be closed. + + There are two cases for the server upon receipt of this + command: (1) the FTP service command was already completed, + or (2) the FTP service command is still in progress. + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 31] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + In the first case, the server closes the data connection + (if it is open) and responds with a 226 reply, indicating + that the abort command was successfully processed. + + In the second case, the server aborts the FTP service in + progress and closes the data connection, returning a 426 + reply to indicate that the service request terminated + abnormally. The server then sends a 226 reply, + indicating that the abort command was successfully + processed. + + DELETE (DELE) + + This command causes the file specified in the pathname to be + deleted at the server site. If an extra level of protection + is desired (such as the query, "Do you really wish to + delete?"), it should be provided by the user-FTP process. + + REMOVE DIRECTORY (RMD) + + This command causes the directory specified in the pathname + to be removed as a directory (if the pathname is absolute) + or as a subdirectory of the current working directory (if + the pathname is relative). See Appendix II. + + MAKE DIRECTORY (MKD) + + This command causes the directory specified in the pathname + to be created as a directory (if the pathname is absolute) + or as a subdirectory of the current working directory (if + the pathname is relative). See Appendix II. + + PRINT WORKING DIRECTORY (PWD) + + This command causes the name of the current working + directory to be returned in the reply. See Appendix II. + + LIST (LIST) + + This command causes a list to be sent from the server to the + passive DTP. If the pathname specifies a directory or other + group of files, the server should transfer a list of files + in the specified directory. If the pathname specifies a + file then the server should send current information on the + file. A null argument implies the user's current working or + default directory. The data transfer is over the data + connection in type ASCII or type EBCDIC. (The user must + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 32] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + ensure that the TYPE is appropriately ASCII or EBCDIC). + Since the information on a file may vary widely from system + to system, this information may be hard to use automatically + in a program, but may be quite useful to a human user. + + NAME LIST (NLST) + + This command causes a directory listing to be sent from + server to user site. The pathname should specify a + directory or other system-specific file group descriptor; a + null argument implies the current directory. The server + will return a stream of names of files and no other + information. The data will be transferred in ASCII or + EBCDIC type over the data connection as valid pathname + strings separated by <CRLF> or <NL>. (Again the user must + ensure that the TYPE is correct.) This command is intended + to return information that can be used by a program to + further process the files automatically. For example, in + the implementation of a "multiple get" function. + + SITE PARAMETERS (SITE) + + This command is used by the server to provide services + specific to his system that are essential to file transfer + but not sufficiently universal to be included as commands in + the protocol. The nature of these services and the + specification of their syntax can be stated in a reply to + the HELP SITE command. + + SYSTEM (SYST) + + This command is used to find out the type of operating + system at the server. The reply shall have as its first + word one of the system names listed in the current version + of the Assigned Numbers document [4]. + + STATUS (STAT) + + This command shall cause a status response to be sent over + the control connection in the form of a reply. The command + may be sent during a file transfer (along with the Telnet IP + and Synch signals--see the Section on FTP Commands) in which + case the server will respond with the status of the + operation in progress, or it may be sent between file + transfers. In the latter case, the command may have an + argument field. If the argument is a pathname, the command + is analogous to the "list" command except that data shall be + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 33] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + transferred over the control connection. If a partial + pathname is given, the server may respond with a list of + file names or attributes associated with that specification. + If no argument is given, the server should return general + status information about the server FTP process. This + should include current values of all transfer parameters and + the status of connections. + + HELP (HELP) + + This command shall cause the server to send helpful + information regarding its implementation status over the + control connection to the user. The command may take an + argument (e.g., any command name) and return more specific + information as a response. The reply is type 211 or 214. + It is suggested that HELP be allowed before entering a USER + command. The server may use this reply to specify + site-dependent parameters, e.g., in response to HELP SITE. + + NOOP (NOOP) + + This command does not affect any parameters or previously + entered commands. It specifies no action other than that the + server send an OK reply. + + The File Transfer Protocol follows the specifications of the Telnet + protocol for all communications over the control connection. Since + the language used for Telnet communication may be a negotiated + option, all references in the next two sections will be to the + "Telnet language" and the corresponding "Telnet end-of-line code". + Currently, one may take these to mean NVT-ASCII and <CRLF>. No other + specifications of the Telnet protocol will be cited. + + FTP commands are "Telnet strings" terminated by the "Telnet end of + line code". The command codes themselves are alphabetic characters + terminated by the character <SP> (Space) if parameters follow and + Telnet-EOL otherwise. The command codes and the semantics of + commands are described in this section; the detailed syntax of + commands is specified in the Section on Commands, the reply sequences + are discussed in the Section on Sequencing of Commands and Replies, + and scenarios illustrating the use of commands are provided in the + Section on Typical FTP Scenarios. + + FTP commands may be partitioned as those specifying access-control + identifiers, data transfer parameters, or FTP service requests. + Certain commands (such as ABOR, STAT, QUIT) may be sent over the + control connection while a data transfer is in progress. Some + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 34] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + servers may not be able to monitor the control and data connections + simultaneously, in which case some special action will be necessary + to get the server's attention. The following ordered format is + tentatively recommended: + + 1. User system inserts the Telnet "Interrupt Process" (IP) signal + in the Telnet stream. + + 2. User system sends the Telnet "Synch" signal. + + 3. User system inserts the command (e.g., ABOR) in the Telnet + stream. + + 4. Server PI, after receiving "IP", scans the Telnet stream for + EXACTLY ONE FTP command. + + (For other servers this may not be necessary but the actions listed + above should have no unusual effect.) + + 4.2. FTP REPLIES + + Replies to File Transfer Protocol commands are devised to ensure + the synchronization of requests and actions in the process of file + transfer, and to guarantee that the user process always knows the + state of the Server. Every command must generate at least one + reply, although there may be more than one; in the latter case, + the multiple replies must be easily distinguished. In addition, + some commands occur in sequential groups, such as USER, PASS and + ACCT, or RNFR and RNTO. The replies show the existence of an + intermediate state if all preceding commands have been successful. + A failure at any point in the sequence necessitates the repetition + of the entire sequence from the beginning. + + The details of the command-reply sequence are made explicit in + a set of state diagrams below. + + An FTP reply consists of a three digit number (transmitted as + three alphanumeric characters) followed by some text. The number + is intended for use by automata to determine what state to enter + next; the text is intended for the human user. It is intended + that the three digits contain enough encoded information that the + user-process (the User-PI) will not need to examine the text and + may either discard it or pass it on to the user, as appropriate. + In particular, the text may be server-dependent, so there are + likely to be varying texts for each reply code. + + A reply is defined to contain the 3-digit code, followed by Space + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 35] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + <SP>, followed by one line of text (where some maximum line length + has been specified), and terminated by the Telnet end-of-line + code. There will be cases however, where the text is longer than + a single line. In these cases the complete text must be bracketed + so the User-process knows when it may stop reading the reply (i.e. + stop processing input on the control connection) and go do other + things. This requires a special format on the first line to + indicate that more than one line is coming, and another on the + last line to designate it as the last. At least one of these must + contain the appropriate reply code to indicate the state of the + transaction. To satisfy all factions, it was decided that both + the first and last line codes should be the same. + + Thus the format for multi-line replies is that the first line + will begin with the exact required reply code, followed + immediately by a Hyphen, "-" (also known as Minus), followed by + text. The last line will begin with the same code, followed + immediately by Space <SP>, optionally some text, and the Telnet + end-of-line code. + + For example: + 123-First line + Second line + 234 A line beginning with numbers + 123 The last line + + The user-process then simply needs to search for the second + occurrence of the same reply code, followed by <SP> (Space), at + the beginning of a line, and ignore all intermediary lines. If + an intermediary line begins with a 3-digit number, the Server + must pad the front to avoid confusion. + + This scheme allows standard system routines to be used for + reply information (such as for the STAT reply), with + "artificial" first and last lines tacked on. In rare cases + where these routines are able to generate three digits and a + Space at the beginning of any line, the beginning of each + text line should be offset by some neutral text, like Space. + + This scheme assumes that multi-line replies may not be nested. + + The three digits of the reply each have a special significance. + This is intended to allow a range of very simple to very + sophisticated responses by the user-process. The first digit + denotes whether the response is good, bad or incomplete. + (Referring to the state diagram), an unsophisticated user-process + will be able to determine its next action (proceed as planned, + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 36] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + redo, retrench, etc.) by simply examining this first digit. A + user-process that wants to know approximately what kind of error + occurred (e.g. file system error, command syntax error) may + examine the second digit, reserving the third digit for the finest + gradation of information (e.g., RNTO command without a preceding + RNFR). + + There are five values for the first digit of the reply code: + + 1yz Positive Preliminary reply + + The requested action is being initiated; expect another + reply before proceeding with a new command. (The + user-process sending another command before the + completion reply would be in violation of protocol; but + server-FTP processes should queue any commands that + arrive while a preceding command is in progress.) This + type of reply can be used to indicate that the command + was accepted and the user-process may now pay attention + to the data connections, for implementations where + simultaneous monitoring is difficult. The server-FTP + process may send at most, one 1yz reply per command. + + 2yz Positive Completion reply + + The requested action has been successfully completed. A + new request may be initiated. + + 3yz Positive Intermediate reply + + The command has been accepted, but the requested action + is being held in abeyance, pending receipt of further + information. The user should send another command + specifying this information. This reply is used in + command sequence groups. + + 4yz Transient Negative Completion reply + + The command was not accepted and the requested action did + not take place, but the error condition is temporary and + the action may be requested again. The user should + return to the beginning of the command sequence, if any. + It is difficult to assign a meaning to "transient", + particularly when two distinct sites (Server- and + User-processes) have to agree on the interpretation. + Each reply in the 4yz category might have a slightly + different time value, but the intent is that the + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 37] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + user-process is encouraged to try again. A rule of thumb + in determining if a reply fits into the 4yz or the 5yz + (Permanent Negative) category is that replies are 4yz if + the commands can be repeated without any change in + command form or in properties of the User or Server + (e.g., the command is spelled the same with the same + arguments used; the user does not change his file access + or user name; the server does not put up a new + implementation.) + + 5yz Permanent Negative Completion reply + + The command was not accepted and the requested action did + not take place. The User-process is discouraged from + repeating the exact request (in the same sequence). Even + some "permanent" error conditions can be corrected, so + the human user may want to direct his User-process to + reinitiate the command sequence by direct action at some + point in the future (e.g., after the spelling has been + changed, or the user has altered his directory status.) + + The following function groupings are encoded in the second + digit: + + x0z Syntax - These replies refer to syntax errors, + syntactically correct commands that don't fit any + functional category, unimplemented or superfluous + commands. + + x1z Information - These are replies to requests for + information, such as status or help. + + x2z Connections - Replies referring to the control and + data connections. + + x3z Authentication and accounting - Replies for the login + process and accounting procedures. + + x4z Unspecified as yet. + + x5z File system - These replies indicate the status of the + Server file system vis-a-vis the requested transfer or + other file system action. + + The third digit gives a finer gradation of meaning in each of + the function categories, specified by the second digit. The + list of replies below will illustrate this. Note that the text + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 38] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + associated with each reply is recommended, rather than + mandatory, and may even change according to the command with + which it is associated. The reply codes, on the other hand, + must strictly follow the specifications in the last section; + that is, Server implementations should not invent new codes for + situations that are only slightly different from the ones + described here, but rather should adapt codes already defined. + + A command such as TYPE or ALLO whose successful execution + does not offer the user-process any new information will + cause a 200 reply to be returned. If the command is not + implemented by a particular Server-FTP process because it + has no relevance to that computer system, for example ALLO + at a TOPS20 site, a Positive Completion reply is still + desired so that the simple User-process knows it can proceed + with its course of action. A 202 reply is used in this case + with, for example, the reply text: "No storage allocation + necessary." If, on the other hand, the command requests a + non-site-specific action and is unimplemented, the response + is 502. A refinement of that is the 504 reply for a command + that is implemented, but that requests an unimplemented + parameter. + + 4.2.1 Reply Codes by Function Groups + + 200 Command okay. + 500 Syntax error, command unrecognized. + This may include errors such as command line too long. + 501 Syntax error in parameters or arguments. + 202 Command not implemented, superfluous at this site. + 502 Command not implemented. + 503 Bad sequence of commands. + 504 Command not implemented for that parameter. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 39] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 110 Restart marker reply. + In this case, the text is exact and not left to the + particular implementation; it must read: + MARK yyyy = mmmm + Where yyyy is User-process data stream marker, and mmmm + server's equivalent marker (note the spaces between markers + and "="). + 211 System status, or system help reply. + 212 Directory status. + 213 File status. + 214 Help message. + On how to use the server or the meaning of a particular + non-standard command. This reply is useful only to the + human user. + 215 NAME system type. + Where NAME is an official system name from the list in the + Assigned Numbers document. + + 120 Service ready in nnn minutes. + 220 Service ready for new user. + 221 Service closing control connection. + Logged out if appropriate. + 421 Service not available, closing control connection. + This may be a reply to any command if the service knows it + must shut down. + 125 Data connection already open; transfer starting. + 225 Data connection open; no transfer in progress. + 425 Can't open data connection. + 226 Closing data connection. + Requested file action successful (for example, file + transfer or file abort). + 426 Connection closed; transfer aborted. + 227 Entering Passive Mode (h1,h2,h3,h4,p1,p2). + + 230 User logged in, proceed. + 530 Not logged in. + 331 User name okay, need password. + 332 Need account for login. + 532 Need account for storing files. + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 40] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 150 File status okay; about to open data connection. + 250 Requested file action okay, completed. + 257 "PATHNAME" created. + 350 Requested file action pending further information. + 450 Requested file action not taken. + File unavailable (e.g., file busy). + 550 Requested action not taken. + File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access). + 451 Requested action aborted. Local error in processing. + 551 Requested action aborted. Page type unknown. + 452 Requested action not taken. + Insufficient storage space in system. + 552 Requested file action aborted. + Exceeded storage allocation (for current directory or + dataset). + 553 Requested action not taken. + File name not allowed. + + + 4.2.2 Numeric Order List of Reply Codes + + 110 Restart marker reply. + In this case, the text is exact and not left to the + particular implementation; it must read: + MARK yyyy = mmmm + Where yyyy is User-process data stream marker, and mmmm + server's equivalent marker (note the spaces between markers + and "="). + 120 Service ready in nnn minutes. + 125 Data connection already open; transfer starting. + 150 File status okay; about to open data connection. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 41] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 200 Command okay. + 202 Command not implemented, superfluous at this site. + 211 System status, or system help reply. + 212 Directory status. + 213 File status. + 214 Help message. + On how to use the server or the meaning of a particular + non-standard command. This reply is useful only to the + human user. + 215 NAME system type. + Where NAME is an official system name from the list in the + Assigned Numbers document. + 220 Service ready for new user. + 221 Service closing control connection. + Logged out if appropriate. + 225 Data connection open; no transfer in progress. + 226 Closing data connection. + Requested file action successful (for example, file + transfer or file abort). + 227 Entering Passive Mode (h1,h2,h3,h4,p1,p2). + 230 User logged in, proceed. + 250 Requested file action okay, completed. + 257 "PATHNAME" created. + + 331 User name okay, need password. + 332 Need account for login. + 350 Requested file action pending further information. + + 421 Service not available, closing control connection. + This may be a reply to any command if the service knows it + must shut down. + 425 Can't open data connection. + 426 Connection closed; transfer aborted. + 450 Requested file action not taken. + File unavailable (e.g., file busy). + 451 Requested action aborted: local error in processing. + 452 Requested action not taken. + Insufficient storage space in system. + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 42] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 500 Syntax error, command unrecognized. + This may include errors such as command line too long. + 501 Syntax error in parameters or arguments. + 502 Command not implemented. + 503 Bad sequence of commands. + 504 Command not implemented for that parameter. + 530 Not logged in. + 532 Need account for storing files. + 550 Requested action not taken. + File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access). + 551 Requested action aborted: page type unknown. + 552 Requested file action aborted. + Exceeded storage allocation (for current directory or + dataset). + 553 Requested action not taken. + File name not allowed. + + +5. DECLARATIVE SPECIFICATIONS + + 5.1. MINIMUM IMPLEMENTATION + + In order to make FTP workable without needless error messages, the + following minimum implementation is required for all servers: + + TYPE - ASCII Non-print + MODE - Stream + STRUCTURE - File, Record + COMMANDS - USER, QUIT, PORT, + TYPE, MODE, STRU, + for the default values + RETR, STOR, + NOOP. + + The default values for transfer parameters are: + + TYPE - ASCII Non-print + MODE - Stream + STRU - File + + All hosts must accept the above as the standard defaults. + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 43] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 5.2. CONNECTIONS + + The server protocol interpreter shall "listen" on Port L. The + user or user protocol interpreter shall initiate the full-duplex + control connection. Server- and user- processes should follow the + conventions of the Telnet protocol as specified in the + ARPA-Internet Protocol Handbook [1]. Servers are under no + obligation to provide for editing of command lines and may require + that it be done in the user host. The control connection shall be + closed by the server at the user's request after all transfers and + replies are completed. + + The user-DTP must "listen" on the specified data port; this may be + the default user port (U) or a port specified in the PORT command. + The server shall initiate the data connection from his own default + data port (L-1) using the specified user data port. The direction + of the transfer and the port used will be determined by the FTP + service command. + + Note that all FTP implementation must support data transfer using + the default port, and that only the USER-PI may initiate the use + of non-default ports. + + When data is to be transferred between two servers, A and B (refer + to Figure 2), the user-PI, C, sets up control connections with + both server-PI's. One of the servers, say A, is then sent a PASV + command telling him to "listen" on his data port rather than + initiate a connection when he receives a transfer service command. + When the user-PI receives an acknowledgment to the PASV command, + which includes the identity of the host and port being listened + on, the user-PI then sends A's port, a, to B in a PORT command; a + reply is returned. The user-PI may then send the corresponding + service commands to A and B. Server B initiates the connection + and the transfer proceeds. The command-reply sequence is listed + below where the messages are vertically synchronous but + horizontally asynchronous: + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 44] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + User-PI - Server A User-PI - Server B + ------------------ ------------------ + + C->A : Connect C->B : Connect + C->A : PASV + A->C : 227 Entering Passive Mode. A1,A2,A3,A4,a1,a2 + C->B : PORT A1,A2,A3,A4,a1,a2 + B->C : 200 Okay + C->A : STOR C->B : RETR + B->A : Connect to HOST-A, PORT-a + + Figure 3 + + The data connection shall be closed by the server under the + conditions described in the Section on Establishing Data + Connections. If the data connection is to be closed following a + data transfer where closing the connection is not required to + indicate the end-of-file, the server must do so immediately. + Waiting until after a new transfer command is not permitted + because the user-process will have already tested the data + connection to see if it needs to do a "listen"; (remember that the + user must "listen" on a closed data port BEFORE sending the + transfer request). To prevent a race condition here, the server + sends a reply (226) after closing the data connection (or if the + connection is left open, a "file transfer completed" reply (250) + and the user-PI should wait for one of these replies before + issuing a new transfer command). + + Any time either the user or server see that the connection is + being closed by the other side, it should promptly read any + remaining data queued on the connection and issue the close on its + own side. + + 5.3. COMMANDS + + The commands are Telnet character strings transmitted over the + control connections as described in the Section on FTP Commands. + The command functions and semantics are described in the Section + on Access Control Commands, Transfer Parameter Commands, FTP + Service Commands, and Miscellaneous Commands. The command syntax + is specified here. + + The commands begin with a command code followed by an argument + field. The command codes are four or fewer alphabetic characters. + Upper and lower case alphabetic characters are to be treated + identically. Thus, any of the following may represent the + retrieve command: + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 45] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + RETR Retr retr ReTr rETr + + This also applies to any symbols representing parameter values, + such as A or a for ASCII TYPE. The command codes and the argument + fields are separated by one or more spaces. + + The argument field consists of a variable length character string + ending with the character sequence <CRLF> (Carriage Return, Line + Feed) for NVT-ASCII representation; for other negotiated languages + a different end of line character might be used. It should be + noted that the server is to take no action until the end of line + code is received. + + The syntax is specified below in NVT-ASCII. All characters in the + argument field are ASCII characters including any ASCII + represented decimal integers. Square brackets denote an optional + argument field. If the option is not taken, the appropriate + default is implied. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 46] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 5.3.1. FTP COMMANDS + + The following are the FTP commands: + + USER <SP> <username> <CRLF> + PASS <SP> <password> <CRLF> + ACCT <SP> <account-information> <CRLF> + CWD <SP> <pathname> <CRLF> + CDUP <CRLF> + SMNT <SP> <pathname> <CRLF> + QUIT <CRLF> + REIN <CRLF> + PORT <SP> <host-port> <CRLF> + PASV <CRLF> + TYPE <SP> <type-code> <CRLF> + STRU <SP> <structure-code> <CRLF> + MODE <SP> <mode-code> <CRLF> + RETR <SP> <pathname> <CRLF> + STOR <SP> <pathname> <CRLF> + STOU <CRLF> + APPE <SP> <pathname> <CRLF> + ALLO <SP> <decimal-integer> + [<SP> R <SP> <decimal-integer>] <CRLF> + REST <SP> <marker> <CRLF> + RNFR <SP> <pathname> <CRLF> + RNTO <SP> <pathname> <CRLF> + ABOR <CRLF> + DELE <SP> <pathname> <CRLF> + RMD <SP> <pathname> <CRLF> + MKD <SP> <pathname> <CRLF> + PWD <CRLF> + LIST [<SP> <pathname>] <CRLF> + NLST [<SP> <pathname>] <CRLF> + SITE <SP> <string> <CRLF> + SYST <CRLF> + STAT [<SP> <pathname>] <CRLF> + HELP [<SP> <string>] <CRLF> + NOOP <CRLF> + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 47] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 5.3.2. FTP COMMAND ARGUMENTS + + The syntax of the above argument fields (using BNF notation + where applicable) is: + + <username> ::= <string> + <password> ::= <string> + <account-information> ::= <string> + <string> ::= <char> | <char><string> + <char> ::= any of the 128 ASCII characters except <CR> and + <LF> + <marker> ::= <pr-string> + <pr-string> ::= <pr-char> | <pr-char><pr-string> + <pr-char> ::= printable characters, any + ASCII code 33 through 126 + <byte-size> ::= <number> + <host-port> ::= <host-number>,<port-number> + <host-number> ::= <number>,<number>,<number>,<number> + <port-number> ::= <number>,<number> + <number> ::= any decimal integer 1 through 255 + <form-code> ::= N | T | C + <type-code> ::= A [<sp> <form-code>] + | E [<sp> <form-code>] + | I + | L <sp> <byte-size> + <structure-code> ::= F | R | P + <mode-code> ::= S | B | C + <pathname> ::= <string> + <decimal-integer> ::= any decimal integer + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 48] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + 5.4. SEQUENCING OF COMMANDS AND REPLIES + + The communication between the user and server is intended to be an + alternating dialogue. As such, the user issues an FTP command and + the server responds with a prompt primary reply. The user should + wait for this initial primary success or failure response before + sending further commands. + + Certain commands require a second reply for which the user should + also wait. These replies may, for example, report on the progress + or completion of file transfer or the closing of the data + connection. They are secondary replies to file transfer commands. + + One important group of informational replies is the connection + greetings. Under normal circumstances, a server will send a 220 + reply, "awaiting input", when the connection is completed. The + user should wait for this greeting message before sending any + commands. If the server is unable to accept input right away, a + 120 "expected delay" reply should be sent immediately and a 220 + reply when ready. The user will then know not to hang up if there + is a delay. + + Spontaneous Replies + + Sometimes "the system" spontaneously has a message to be sent + to a user (usually all users). For example, "System going down + in 15 minutes". There is no provision in FTP for such + spontaneous information to be sent from the server to the user. + It is recommended that such information be queued in the + server-PI and delivered to the user-PI in the next reply + (possibly making it a multi-line reply). + + The table below lists alternative success and failure replies for + each command. These must be strictly adhered to; a server may + substitute text in the replies, but the meaning and action implied + by the code numbers and by the specific command reply sequence + cannot be altered. + + Command-Reply Sequences + + In this section, the command-reply sequence is presented. Each + command is listed with its possible replies; command groups are + listed together. Preliminary replies are listed first (with + their succeeding replies indented and under them), then + positive and negative completion, and finally intermediary + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 49] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + replies with the remaining commands from the sequence + following. This listing forms the basis for the state + diagrams, which will be presented separately. + + Connection Establishment + 120 + 220 + 220 + 421 + Login + USER + 230 + 530 + 500, 501, 421 + 331, 332 + PASS + 230 + 202 + 530 + 500, 501, 503, 421 + 332 + ACCT + 230 + 202 + 530 + 500, 501, 503, 421 + CWD + 250 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530, 550 + CDUP + 200 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530, 550 + SMNT + 202, 250 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530, 550 + Logout + REIN + 120 + 220 + 220 + 421 + 500, 502 + QUIT + 221 + 500 + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 50] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + Transfer parameters + PORT + 200 + 500, 501, 421, 530 + PASV + 227 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530 + MODE + 200 + 500, 501, 504, 421, 530 + TYPE + 200 + 500, 501, 504, 421, 530 + STRU + 200 + 500, 501, 504, 421, 530 + File action commands + ALLO + 200 + 202 + 500, 501, 504, 421, 530 + REST + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530 + 350 + STOR + 125, 150 + (110) + 226, 250 + 425, 426, 451, 551, 552 + 532, 450, 452, 553 + 500, 501, 421, 530 + STOU + 125, 150 + (110) + 226, 250 + 425, 426, 451, 551, 552 + 532, 450, 452, 553 + 500, 501, 421, 530 + RETR + 125, 150 + (110) + 226, 250 + 425, 426, 451 + 450, 550 + 500, 501, 421, 530 + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 51] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + LIST + 125, 150 + 226, 250 + 425, 426, 451 + 450 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530 + NLST + 125, 150 + 226, 250 + 425, 426, 451 + 450 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530 + APPE + 125, 150 + (110) + 226, 250 + 425, 426, 451, 551, 552 + 532, 450, 550, 452, 553 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530 + RNFR + 450, 550 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530 + 350 + RNTO + 250 + 532, 553 + 500, 501, 502, 503, 421, 530 + DELE + 250 + 450, 550 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530 + RMD + 250 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530, 550 + MKD + 257 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530, 550 + PWD + 257 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 550 + ABOR + 225, 226 + 500, 501, 502, 421 + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 52] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + Informational commands + SYST + 215 + 500, 501, 502, 421 + STAT + 211, 212, 213 + 450 + 500, 501, 502, 421, 530 + HELP + 211, 214 + 500, 501, 502, 421 + Miscellaneous commands + SITE + 200 + 202 + 500, 501, 530 + NOOP + 200 + 500 421 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 53] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + +6. STATE DIAGRAMS + + Here we present state diagrams for a very simple minded FTP + implementation. Only the first digit of the reply codes is used. + There is one state diagram for each group of FTP commands or command + sequences. + + The command groupings were determined by constructing a model for + each command then collecting together the commands with structurally + identical models. + + For each command or command sequence there are three possible + outcomes: success (S), failure (F), and error (E). In the state + diagrams below we use the symbol B for "begin", and the symbol W for + "wait for reply". + + We first present the diagram that represents the largest group of FTP + commands: + + + 1,3 +---+ + ----------->| E | + | +---+ + | + +---+ cmd +---+ 2 +---+ + | B |---------->| W |---------->| S | + +---+ +---+ +---+ + | + | 4,5 +---+ + ----------->| F | + +---+ + + + This diagram models the commands: + + ABOR, ALLO, DELE, CWD, CDUP, SMNT, HELP, MODE, NOOP, PASV, + QUIT, SITE, PORT, SYST, STAT, RMD, MKD, PWD, STRU, and TYPE. + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 54] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + The other large group of commands is represented by a very similar + diagram: + + + 3 +---+ + ----------->| E | + | +---+ + | + +---+ cmd +---+ 2 +---+ + | B |---------->| W |---------->| S | + +---+ --->+---+ +---+ + | | | + | | | 4,5 +---+ + | 1 | ----------->| F | + ----- +---+ + + + This diagram models the commands: + + APPE, LIST, NLST, REIN, RETR, STOR, and STOU. + + Note that this second model could also be used to represent the first + group of commands, the only difference being that in the first group + the 100 series replies are unexpected and therefore treated as error, + while the second group expects (some may require) 100 series replies. + Remember that at most, one 100 series reply is allowed per command. + + The remaining diagrams model command sequences, perhaps the simplest + of these is the rename sequence: + + + +---+ RNFR +---+ 1,2 +---+ + | B |---------->| W |---------->| E | + +---+ +---+ -->+---+ + | | | + 3 | | 4,5 | + -------------- ------ | + | | | +---+ + | ------------->| S | + | | 1,3 | | +---+ + | 2| -------- + | | | | + V | | | + +---+ RNTO +---+ 4,5 ----->+---+ + | |---------->| W |---------->| F | + +---+ +---+ +---+ + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 55] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + The next diagram is a simple model of the Restart command: + + + +---+ REST +---+ 1,2 +---+ + | B |---------->| W |---------->| E | + +---+ +---+ -->+---+ + | | | + 3 | | 4,5 | + -------------- ------ | + | | | +---+ + | ------------->| S | + | | 3 | | +---+ + | 2| -------- + | | | | + V | | | + +---+ cmd +---+ 4,5 ----->+---+ + | |---------->| W |---------->| F | + +---+ -->+---+ +---+ + | | + | 1 | + ------ + + + Where "cmd" is APPE, STOR, or RETR. + + We note that the above three models are similar. The Restart differs + from the Rename two only in the treatment of 100 series replies at + the second stage, while the second group expects (some may require) + 100 series replies. Remember that at most, one 100 series reply is + allowed per command. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 56] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + The most complicated diagram is for the Login sequence: + + + 1 + +---+ USER +---+------------->+---+ + | B |---------->| W | 2 ---->| E | + +---+ +---+------ | -->+---+ + | | | | | + 3 | | 4,5 | | | + -------------- ----- | | | + | | | | | + | | | | | + | --------- | + | 1| | | | + V | | | | + +---+ PASS +---+ 2 | ------>+---+ + | |---------->| W |------------->| S | + +---+ +---+ ---------->+---+ + | | | | | + 3 | |4,5| | | + -------------- -------- | + | | | | | + | | | | | + | ----------- + | 1,3| | | | + V | 2| | | + +---+ ACCT +---+-- | ----->+---+ + | |---------->| W | 4,5 -------->| F | + +---+ +---+------------->+---+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 57] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + Finally, we present a generalized diagram that could be used to model + the command and reply interchange: + + + ------------------------------------ + | | + Begin | | + | V | + | +---+ cmd +---+ 2 +---+ | + -->| |------->| |---------->| | | + | | | W | | S |-----| + -->| | -->| |----- | | | + | +---+ | +---+ 4,5 | +---+ | + | | | | | | | + | | | 1| |3 | +---+ | + | | | | | | | | | + | | ---- | ---->| F |----- + | | | | | + | | | +---+ + ------------------- + | + | + V + End + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 58] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + +7. TYPICAL FTP SCENARIO + + User at host U wanting to transfer files to/from host S: + + In general, the user will communicate to the server via a mediating + user-FTP process. The following may be a typical scenario. The + user-FTP prompts are shown in parentheses, '---->' represents + commands from host U to host S, and '<----' represents replies from + host S to host U. + + LOCAL COMMANDS BY USER ACTION INVOLVED + + ftp (host) multics<CR> Connect to host S, port L, + establishing control connections. + <---- 220 Service ready <CRLF>. + username Doe <CR> USER Doe<CRLF>----> + <---- 331 User name ok, + need password<CRLF>. + password mumble <CR> PASS mumble<CRLF>----> + <---- 230 User logged in<CRLF>. + retrieve (local type) ASCII<CR> + (local pathname) test 1 <CR> User-FTP opens local file in ASCII. + (for. pathname) test.pl1<CR> RETR test.pl1<CRLF> ----> + <---- 150 File status okay; + about to open data + connection<CRLF>. + Server makes data connection + to port U. + + <---- 226 Closing data connection, + file transfer successful<CRLF>. + type Image<CR> TYPE I<CRLF> ----> + <---- 200 Command OK<CRLF> + store (local type) image<CR> + (local pathname) file dump<CR> User-FTP opens local file in Image. + (for.pathname) >udd>cn>fd<CR> STOR >udd>cn>fd<CRLF> ----> + <---- 550 Access denied<CRLF> + terminate QUIT <CRLF> ----> + Server closes all + connections. + +8. CONNECTION ESTABLISHMENT + + The FTP control connection is established via TCP between the user + process port U and the server process port L. This protocol is + assigned the service port 21 (25 octal), that is L=21. + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 59] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + +APPENDIX I - PAGE STRUCTURE + + The need for FTP to support page structure derives principally from + the need to support efficient transmission of files between TOPS-20 + systems, particularly the files used by NLS. + + The file system of TOPS-20 is based on the concept of pages. The + operating system is most efficient at manipulating files as pages. + The operating system provides an interface to the file system so that + many applications view files as sequential streams of characters. + However, a few applications use the underlying page structures + directly, and some of these create holey files. + + A TOPS-20 disk file consists of four things: a pathname, a page + table, a (possibly empty) set of pages, and a set of attributes. + + The pathname is specified in the RETR or STOR command. It includes + the directory name, file name, file name extension, and generation + number. + + The page table contains up to 2**18 entries. Each entry may be + EMPTY, or may point to a page. If it is not empty, there are also + some page-specific access bits; not all pages of a file need have the + same access protection. + + A page is a contiguous set of 512 words of 36 bits each. + + The attributes of the file, in the File Descriptor Block (FDB), + contain such things as creation time, write time, read time, writer's + byte-size, end-of-file pointer, count of reads and writes, backup + system tape numbers, etc. + + Note that there is NO requirement that entries in the page table be + contiguous. There may be empty page table slots between occupied + ones. Also, the end of file pointer is simply a number. There is no + requirement that it in fact point at the "last" datum in the file. + Ordinary sequential I/O calls in TOPS-20 will cause the end of file + pointer to be left after the last datum written, but other operations + may cause it not to be so, if a particular programming system so + requires. + + In fact, in both of these special cases, "holey" files and + end-of-file pointers NOT at the end of the file, occur with NLS data + files. + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 60] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + The TOPS-20 paged files can be sent with the FTP transfer parameters: + TYPE L 36, STRU P, and MODE S (in fact, any mode could be used). + + Each page of information has a header. Each header field, which is a + logical byte, is a TOPS-20 word, since the TYPE is L 36. + + The header fields are: + + Word 0: Header Length. + + The header length is 5. + + Word 1: Page Index. + + If the data is a disk file page, this is the number of that + page in the file's page map. Empty pages (holes) in the file + are simply not sent. Note that a hole is NOT the same as a + page of zeros. + + Word 2: Data Length. + + The number of data words in this page, following the header. + Thus, the total length of the transmission unit is the Header + Length plus the Data Length. + + Word 3: Page Type. + + A code for what type of chunk this is. A data page is type 3, + the FDB page is type 2. + + Word 4: Page Access Control. + + The access bits associated with the page in the file's page + map. (This full word quantity is put into AC2 of an SPACS by + the program reading from net to disk.) + + After the header are Data Length data words. Data Length is + currently either 512 for a data page or 31 for an FDB. Trailing + zeros in a disk file page may be discarded, making Data Length less + than 512 in that case. + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 61] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + +APPENDIX II - DIRECTORY COMMANDS + + Since UNIX has a tree-like directory structure in which directories + are as easy to manipulate as ordinary files, it is useful to expand + the FTP servers on these machines to include commands which deal with + the creation of directories. Since there are other hosts on the + ARPA-Internet which have tree-like directories (including TOPS-20 and + Multics), these commands are as general as possible. + + Four directory commands have been added to FTP: + + MKD pathname + + Make a directory with the name "pathname". + + RMD pathname + + Remove the directory with the name "pathname". + + PWD + + Print the current working directory name. + + CDUP + + Change to the parent of the current working directory. + + The "pathname" argument should be created (removed) as a + subdirectory of the current working directory, unless the "pathname" + string contains sufficient information to specify otherwise to the + server, e.g., "pathname" is an absolute pathname (in UNIX and + Multics), or pathname is something like "<abso.lute.path>" to + TOPS-20. + + REPLY CODES + + The CDUP command is a special case of CWD, and is included to + simplify the implementation of programs for transferring directory + trees between operating systems having different syntaxes for + naming the parent directory. The reply codes for CDUP be + identical to the reply codes of CWD. + + The reply codes for RMD be identical to the reply codes for its + file analogue, DELE. + + The reply codes for MKD, however, are a bit more complicated. A + freshly created directory will probably be the object of a future + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 62] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + CWD command. Unfortunately, the argument to MKD may not always be + a suitable argument for CWD. This is the case, for example, when + a TOPS-20 subdirectory is created by giving just the subdirectory + name. That is, with a TOPS-20 server FTP, the command sequence + + MKD MYDIR + CWD MYDIR + + will fail. The new directory may only be referred to by its + "absolute" name; e.g., if the MKD command above were issued while + connected to the directory <DFRANKLIN>, the new subdirectory + could only be referred to by the name <DFRANKLIN.MYDIR>. + + Even on UNIX and Multics, however, the argument given to MKD may + not be suitable. If it is a "relative" pathname (i.e., a pathname + which is interpreted relative to the current directory), the user + would need to be in the same current directory in order to reach + the subdirectory. Depending on the application, this may be + inconvenient. It is not very robust in any case. + + To solve these problems, upon successful completion of an MKD + command, the server should return a line of the form: + + 257<space>"<directory-name>"<space><commentary> + + That is, the server will tell the user what string to use when + referring to the created directory. The directory name can + contain any character; embedded double-quotes should be escaped by + double-quotes (the "quote-doubling" convention). + + For example, a user connects to the directory /usr/dm, and creates + a subdirectory, named pathname: + + CWD /usr/dm + 200 directory changed to /usr/dm + MKD pathname + 257 "/usr/dm/pathname" directory created + + An example with an embedded double quote: + + MKD foo"bar + 257 "/usr/dm/foo""bar" directory created + CWD /usr/dm/foo"bar + 200 directory changed to /usr/dm/foo"bar + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 63] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + The prior existence of a subdirectory with the same name is an + error, and the server must return an "access denied" error reply + in that case. + + CWD /usr/dm + 200 directory changed to /usr/dm + MKD pathname + 521-"/usr/dm/pathname" directory already exists; + 521 taking no action. + + The failure replies for MKD are analogous to its file creating + cousin, STOR. Also, an "access denied" return is given if a file + name with the same name as the subdirectory will conflict with the + creation of the subdirectory (this is a problem on UNIX, but + shouldn't be one on TOPS-20). + + Essentially because the PWD command returns the same type of + information as the successful MKD command, the successful PWD + command uses the 257 reply code as well. + + SUBTLETIES + + Because these commands will be most useful in transferring + subtrees from one machine to another, carefully observe that the + argument to MKD is to be interpreted as a sub-directory of the + current working directory, unless it contains enough information + for the destination host to tell otherwise. A hypothetical + example of its use in the TOPS-20 world: + + CWD <some.where> + 200 Working directory changed + MKD overrainbow + 257 "<some.where.overrainbow>" directory created + CWD overrainbow + 431 No such directory + CWD <some.where.overrainbow> + 200 Working directory changed + + CWD <some.where> + 200 Working directory changed to <some.where> + MKD <unambiguous> + 257 "<unambiguous>" directory created + CWD <unambiguous> + + Note that the first example results in a subdirectory of the + connected directory. In contrast, the argument in the second + example contains enough information for TOPS-20 to tell that the + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 64] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + <unambiguous> directory is a top-level directory. Note also that + in the first example the user "violated" the protocol by + attempting to access the freshly created directory with a name + other than the one returned by TOPS-20. Problems could have + resulted in this case had there been an <overrainbow> directory; + this is an ambiguity inherent in some TOPS-20 implementations. + Similar considerations apply to the RMD command. The point is + this: except where to do so would violate a host's conventions for + denoting relative versus absolute pathnames, the host should treat + the operands of the MKD and RMD commands as subdirectories. The + 257 reply to the MKD command must always contain the absolute + pathname of the created directory. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 65] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + +APPENDIX III - RFCs on FTP + + Bhushan, Abhay, "A File Transfer Protocol", RFC 114 (NIC 5823), + MIT-Project MAC, 16 April 1971. + + Harslem, Eric, and John Heafner, "Comments on RFC 114 (A File + Transfer Protocol)", RFC 141 (NIC 6726), RAND, 29 April 1971. + + Bhushan, Abhay, et al, "The File Transfer Protocol", RFC 172 + (NIC 6794), MIT-Project MAC, 23 June 1971. + + Braden, Bob, "Comments on DTP and FTP Proposals", RFC 238 (NIC 7663), + UCLA/CCN, 29 September 1971. + + Bhushan, Abhay, et al, "The File Transfer Protocol", RFC 265 + (NIC 7813), MIT-Project MAC, 17 November 1971. + + McKenzie, Alex, "A Suggested Addition to File Transfer Protocol", + RFC 281 (NIC 8163), BBN, 8 December 1971. + + Bhushan, Abhay, "The Use of "Set Data Type" Transaction in File + Transfer Protocol", RFC 294 (NIC 8304), MIT-Project MAC, + 25 January 1972. + + Bhushan, Abhay, "The File Transfer Protocol", RFC 354 (NIC 10596), + MIT-Project MAC, 8 July 1972. + + Bhushan, Abhay, "Comments on the File Transfer Protocol (RFC 354)", + RFC 385 (NIC 11357), MIT-Project MAC, 18 August 1972. + + Hicks, Greg, "User FTP Documentation", RFC 412 (NIC 12404), Utah, + 27 November 1972. + + Bhushan, Abhay, "File Transfer Protocol (FTP) Status and Further + Comments", RFC 414 (NIC 12406), MIT-Project MAC, 20 November 1972. + + Braden, Bob, "Comments on File Transfer Protocol", RFC 430 + (NIC 13299), UCLA/CCN, 7 February 1973. + + Thomas, Bob, and Bob Clements, "FTP Server-Server Interaction", + RFC 438 (NIC 13770), BBN, 15 January 1973. + + Braden, Bob, "Print Files in FTP", RFC 448 (NIC 13299), UCLA/CCN, + 27 February 1973. + + McKenzie, Alex, "File Transfer Protocol", RFC 454 (NIC 14333), BBN, + 16 February 1973. + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 66] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + Bressler, Bob, and Bob Thomas, "Mail Retrieval via FTP", RFC 458 + (NIC 14378), BBN-NET and BBN-TENEX, 20 February 1973. + + Neigus, Nancy, "File Transfer Protocol", RFC 542 (NIC 17759), BBN, + 12 July 1973. + + Krilanovich, Mark, and George Gregg, "Comments on the File Transfer + Protocol", RFC 607 (NIC 21255), UCSB, 7 January 1974. + + Pogran, Ken, and Nancy Neigus, "Response to RFC 607 - Comments on the + File Transfer Protocol", RFC 614 (NIC 21530), BBN, 28 January 1974. + + Krilanovich, Mark, George Gregg, Wayne Hathaway, and Jim White, + "Comments on the File Transfer Protocol", RFC 624 (NIC 22054), UCSB, + Ames Research Center, SRI-ARC, 28 February 1974. + + Bhushan, Abhay, "FTP Comments and Response to RFC 430", RFC 463 + (NIC 14573), MIT-DMCG, 21 February 1973. + + Braden, Bob, "FTP Data Compression", RFC 468 (NIC 14742), UCLA/CCN, + 8 March 1973. + + Bhushan, Abhay, "FTP and Network Mail System", RFC 475 (NIC 14919), + MIT-DMCG, 6 March 1973. + + Bressler, Bob, and Bob Thomas "FTP Server-Server Interaction - II", + RFC 478 (NIC 14947), BBN-NET and BBN-TENEX, 26 March 1973. + + White, Jim, "Use of FTP by the NIC Journal", RFC 479 (NIC 14948), + SRI-ARC, 8 March 1973. + + White, Jim, "Host-Dependent FTP Parameters", RFC 480 (NIC 14949), + SRI-ARC, 8 March 1973. + + Padlipsky, Mike, "An FTP Command-Naming Problem", RFC 506 + (NIC 16157), MIT-Multics, 26 June 1973. + + Day, John, "Memo to FTP Group (Proposal for File Access Protocol)", + RFC 520 (NIC 16819), Illinois, 25 June 1973. + + Merryman, Robert, "The UCSD-CC Server-FTP Facility", RFC 532 + (NIC 17451), UCSD-CC, 22 June 1973. + + Braden, Bob, "TENEX FTP Problem", RFC 571 (NIC 18974), UCLA/CCN, + 15 November 1973. + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 67] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + + McKenzie, Alex, and Jon Postel, "Telnet and FTP Implementation - + Schedule Change", RFC 593 (NIC 20615), BBN and MITRE, + 29 November 1973. + + Sussman, Julie, "FTP Error Code Usage for More Reliable Mail + Service", RFC 630 (NIC 30237), BBN, 10 April 1974. + + Postel, Jon, "Revised FTP Reply Codes", RFC 640 (NIC 30843), + UCLA/NMC, 5 June 1974. + + Harvey, Brian, "Leaving Well Enough Alone", RFC 686 (NIC 32481), + SU-AI, 10 May 1975. + + Harvey, Brian, "One More Try on the FTP", RFC 691 (NIC 32700), SU-AI, + 28 May 1975. + + Lieb, J., "CWD Command of FTP", RFC 697 (NIC 32963), 14 July 1975. + + Harrenstien, Ken, "FTP Extension: XSEN", RFC 737 (NIC 42217), SRI-KL, + 31 October 1977. + + Harrenstien, Ken, "FTP Extension: XRSQ/XRCP", RFC 743 (NIC 42758), + SRI-KL, 30 December 1977. + + Lebling, P. David, "Survey of FTP Mail and MLFL", RFC 751, MIT, + 10 December 1978. + + Postel, Jon, "File Transfer Protocol Specification", RFC 765, ISI, + June 1980. + + Mankins, David, Dan Franklin, and Buzz Owen, "Directory Oriented FTP + Commands", RFC 776, BBN, December 1980. + + Padlipsky, Michael, "FTP Unique-Named Store Command", RFC 949, MITRE, + July 1985. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 68] + + + +RFC 959 October 1985 +File Transfer Protocol + + +REFERENCES + + [1] Feinler, Elizabeth, "Internet Protocol Transition Workbook", + Network Information Center, SRI International, March 1982. + + [2] Postel, Jon, "Transmission Control Protocol - DARPA Internet + Program Protocol Specification", RFC 793, DARPA, September 1981. + + [3] Postel, Jon, and Joyce Reynolds, "Telnet Protocol + Specification", RFC 854, ISI, May 1983. + + [4] Reynolds, Joyce, and Jon Postel, "Assigned Numbers", RFC 943, + ISI, April 1985. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Postel & Reynolds [Page 69] + |