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 RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]
      [ into the online RFC archives by BBN Corp. under the   ]
      [ direction of Alex McKenzie.                   12/96   ]







                                                               [Page 1]