• 软件测试技术
  • 软件测试博客
  • 软件测试视频
  • 开源软件测试技术
  • 软件测试论坛
  • 软件测试沙龙
  • 软件测试资料下载
  • 软件测试杂志
  • 软件测试人才招聘
    暂时没有公告

字号: | 推荐给好友 上一篇 | 下一篇

RFC250 - Some thoughts on file transfer

发布: 2007-6-23 14:09 | 作者:   | 来源:   | 查看: 13次 | 进入软件测试论坛讨论

领测软件测试网

   
  Network Working Group H. Brodie
Request for Comments #250 UCLA-NMC
NIC #7691 Computer Science
Categories: D5, D7 7 October 71
Updates: None
Obsoletes: None

Some Thoughts on File Transfer

There are several aspects of the proposed Data Transfer Protocol (RFC
#171) and File Transfer Protocol (RFC#172) which we believe could
use further clarification and perhaps revision. Interest in
transferring larger amounts of data than is typically sent via the
usual TELNET connection is increasing, and at least at UCLA-NMC
implementation attempts have pointed out several difficulties with
the proposed protocols.

First, and probably most easily decided, is the ambiguity in RFC#171
with regards to the sequence number field of the descriptor and count
transaction. The description provided for the transaction header
provides for 16 bit sequence number. However, the sequence number
field in the error codes transaction only provides for 8 bits. We
are of the opinion that 8 bits is sufficient for a sequence number
field. If the sequence number is reduced to 8 bits, and the two NUL
bytes are deleted from the descriptor and count header, then its size
is reduced to 48 bits, which would seem to be as convenient to handle
as the proposed 72 bit transaction header.

Another source of difficulty lies in the implementation of the (the
SEX time-sharing system) the 'end' of a file (which presumably would
be the begin point of an Append transaction) is almost com- pletely
context-defined--i.e., the program reading the file determines when
it has reached the end of the file. Therefore, the meaning of
'Append' is somewhat hazy, and since the proposed Mail Box Protocol
uses the Append feature, not implementing this command in a File
Transfer service is costly in terms of lost useability.

We believe that resolution of these ambiguities will lead to a
greatly accelerated implementation schedule, at least here at UCLA-
NMC.

[ This RFCwas put into machine readable form for entry ]
[ into the online RFCarchives by BBN Corp. under the ]
[ direction of Alex McKenzie. 12/96 ]

文章来源于领测软件测试网 https://www.ltesting.net/


关于领测软件测试网 | 领测软件测试网合作伙伴 | 广告服务 | 投稿指南 | 联系我们 | 网站地图 | 友情链接
版权所有(C) 2003-2010 TestAge(领测软件测试网)|领测国际科技(北京)有限公司|软件测试工程师培训网 All Rights Reserved
北京市海淀区中关村南大街9号北京理工科技大厦1402室 京ICP备10010545号-5
技术支持和业务联系:info@testage.com.cn 电话:010-51297073

软件测试 | 领测国际ISTQBISTQB官网TMMiTMMi认证国际软件测试工程师认证领测软件测试网