X-Envelope-to: NOVELL@SUVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"NOVELL@SUVM.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: JRD
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.novell
Date:         Tue, 18 Aug 1992 12:38:32 -0600
Reply-To:     Novell LAN Interest Group <NOVELL@SUVM.BITNET>
From:         Joe Doupnik <JRD@USU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: LWP

>> >
>> >I have begun playing with Lan Workplace for Windows 4.01.  It is nice
>> >compared to Qvtnet and basic Telnet.  One glich that I have faced is
>> >that FTPing shows directories on certain servers as folders and seems
>> >to be basically useless.  I tried most of the various settings: UNIX,
>> >other, VMS, VM/MV(?), OS/2, DOS.  My efforts were to no avail.  The
>> >places I tried were wuarchive.wustl.edu, Splicer, simtel...
>       <parts removed>
>The complexities involved in presenting remote file systems in a consistent
>GUI sort of way using a protocol such as FTP are endless, since there is
>no standard accepted way for FTP servers to represent files and directories.
>Just type "dir" on a few different FTP servers and notice how different the
>representations for files and directories are.  A discussion on standardizing
>this representation would certainly be worthwhile, but who know when such
>mechanisms would be commonplace.
>
>I for one, feel that the FTP client in LWP v4.01 is a pretty good attempt
>at this task, the version I'm working with now in house is even better...
>Nonetheless, there are no doubt going to be FTP servers that will surprise
>us.  If you mostly exchange files with UNIX systems, File Express makes
>doing things like remote searches by file name, recursive directory copies,
>etc, easier for the novice.  Then again, I too find myself doing FTP
>operations in DOS boxes using the venerable command-line version of FTP
>quite often (old habits...).
>
>-- brian
>____________________________________________________________________________
>         Brian Meek       Novell, Inc. - 2180 Fortune Dr. San Jose, CA 95131
>Internet Mail: brian@novell.COM                        Phone: (408) 473-8375
-----------
        Since both Hughes Prolinc and LWP try the same approach of decoding
directories and files as themselves for ftp in Windows, and both get into
similar hot water, one wonders if it is wise to continue trying. I tested
LWP against ftp.is.sandy.novell.com and it just plain collapses. This is
not so much a comment on the skills of the ftp programmers but rather a
reflection of the disarry and lack of information provided by the ftp protocol.
What was great many years ago is not sufficient today, and the TCP/IP
communitity does not seem to be making progress on the matter. So, things
go belly up when automation tries to figure out files from directories, and
that means the user needs to step in and exercise control or the algorithms
need replacment.
        The GUI environment makes things tougher. The temptation is to
run the mouse across a section of the screen and click on the MGET button
to retrieve items. Ho ho. That invitation is not reliable at all, and I
end up with a crashed system at times. Compounding this are the white lies
told by ftp servers: one IBM mainframe reports files as directories if I
do an MGET, but delivers them as files if I do individual GETs, and this is
at DOS command line. Brother, ftp is long long overdue for replacment.
It would be nice if the protocol had heirarchies of file types, such as
files (and their resource forks), directory entries, volume names, and so on.
Defining those is a nice decade long job for an ISO committee, or six months
by troops on the firing line.
        Whatever the situation I think the ftp programs should not die in
the attempt of transfering things, but they do so today under Windows.
        Joe D.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU