On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 04:04:07PM -0400, der Mouse wrote:
> >> [...ftp client vs EPSV vs download.fedora.redhat.com...]
> > I'm guessing that they are using vsftpd (at least I believe that the
> > vsftpd documentation claims use by RedHat).  You may want to take a
> > look at the vsftpd code.  It is in pkgsrc.
> 
> I got a reply from Red Hat.  They say they "do not currently support
> commands from the epsv command set" and ask me to "[p]lease use
> commands from the classical passive command set only".  I sent back a
> reply pointing out that their server responds to EPSV with something
> that looks like a perfectly good EPSV response, and they may want to
> change that if they don't really support EPSV.  No response to that
> yet.
> 
> They do acknowledge that this "is not a great response", adding "but it
> is all we have right now", so there is at least some awareness that the
> current situation is..suboptimal.
> 
> In any case, it's no particular skin off my nose; by fetching manually,
> with epsv4 disabled and passive enabled, I was able to get the files I
> actually wanted.  I mentioned it here in case there was any desire to
> tweak our FTP client to handle this better somehow.  In view of what
> you say about vsftpd, it might be worth doing interop testing of our
> client against a vsftpd server, if anyone thinks it's worth the trouble.

... and with luck interop testing of ipnat ftp-proxy / libexec/ftp-proxy :-)

(I'm happy to test, but then, how to fix?)

Patrick