Re: FTP alternative?

[Matthias Scheler <tron%zhadum.org.uk@localhost>]

On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 01:02:03PM -0500, Peter Eisch wrote:
> The client gets NAT'd when connecting out to the server.  The IP address
> inside the PORT and other commands in the ftp session aren't getting NAT'd
> and the RFC 1918 address leak out.

I know about the problems with active FTP and NAT.

But why do you use a client that uses "PORT" and not "PASV"? The only
FTP client without passive mode support that is still sold is the
command line client bundled with Windows. And I'm sure that there are
replacements for that one.

        Kind regards

-- 
Matthias Scheler                                  http://zhadum.org.uk/