[37883] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: EMAIL != FTP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jan P Tietze)
Fri May 25 09:43:33 2001
Message-ID: <3B0E5EA0.C6F67DBA@netheads.de>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 15:31:12 +0200
From: Jan P Tietze <jptietze@netheads.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: nanog@nanog.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Craig Partridge wrote:
> Part of this discussion is just plain bizarre.
>
> It is worth remembering that SMTP is, in most respects, simply FTP reworked.
> In many ways, HTTP is FTP badly reinvented.
I disagree - HTTP is more firewall/NAT friendly, and has no active/passive mode.
> But for a little extra SMTP handshaking at the start, there is no efficiency
> difference in transfer rate between SMTP and FTP. Probably the same is
No, there is overhead in encoding of binary data for transmission by SMTP.
> true for HTTP though I've not looked.
Jan
