DOS ain't dead - FTP ASCII vs binary "image"

FTP ASCII vs binary "image" (Announce)

posted by DOS386, 24.07.2010, 12:12

> This is the correct behavior (as defined by FTP RFCs) for a command line FTP client.

> If FireFox is getting it as a binary file, then it must be stuffing a 'BIN' command
> in the command stream first. You'd have to use a packet sniffer to verify that.
> But remember, the server sets the default transfer mode, not the client.

Faulty servers ...

> If you find a client that gets BINARY

Many clients, and the servers are apparently "optimized" for such :-(

> [2 & 3] What OS are you running Firefox under?

Windaube ???

> blown OS network stack to a DOS packet driver, and I'm willing to bet that
> the DOS packet driver is part of the problem. My code doesn't lose packets
> - it just reports the ones that it didn't get.

:-|

> Other people are not reporting this, and generally when it happens it is
> something specific to the packet driver. Have you looked for a different
> version of the packet driver for your card?

No. The internet is not really crowded with DOS drivers AFAIK :-(

> Are all FTP servers bad, or only particular ones?

I tested 2 only so far.

I'll test on other PC (different PCI card) too.

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

Post reply

Complete thread:

mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - mbbrutman, 21.01.2010, 18:06 (Announce)
- mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - Japheth, 22.01.2010, 09:47
  - mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - mbbrutman, 22.01.2010, 16:56
    - mTCP DOS TCP/IP apps for small machines - mbbrutman, 07.02.2010, 16:35
  - Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - mbbrutman, 14.03.2010, 03:22
    - Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - Rugxulo, 14.03.2010, 03:56
      - Forget the library .. time to open-source the code? - mbbrutman, 14.03.2010, 15:01
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Arjay, 27.06.2010, 22:27
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Rugxulo, 28.06.2010, 06:30
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - DOS386, 28.06.2010, 12:05
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Arjay, 28.06.2010, 14:22
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 07:08
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Laaca, 01.07.2010, 13:14
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 16:06
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - DOS386, 01.07.2010, 13:20
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 01.07.2010, 16:03
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - Laaca, 01.07.2010, 19:16
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - mbbrutman, 03.07.2010, 16:04
        mTCP new release 27/June/2010 - now ported to Open Watcom - DOS386, 14.07.2010, 03:51
- mTCP interfacing with TINY remote control for DOS? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 12:41
  - mTCP interfacing with TINY remote control for DOS? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 16:09
    - mTCP interfacing with TINY remote control for DOS? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 17:49
- mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 14:07
  - mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 15:22
    - mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 17:30
      - mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - mbbrutman, 20.07.2010, 19:32
        mTCP DOS - NC documentation issue (design bug)? - Arjay, 20.07.2010, 21:56
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 23.07.2010, 07:27
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 24.07.2010, 01:04
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 24.07.2010, 12:12
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Japheth, 24.07.2010, 15:31
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 24.07.2010, 15:36
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 24.07.2010, 16:23
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Japheth, 24.07.2010, 16:57
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 25.07.2010, 01:35
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - Rugxulo, 25.07.2010, 05:34
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - DOS386, 25.07.2010, 06:16
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" - mbbrutman, 25.07.2010, 17:17
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 26.07.2010, 02:03
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - mbbrutman, 26.07.2010, 03:11
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 27.07.2010, 02:53
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - mbbrutman, 27.07.2010, 03:31
        FTP ASCII vs binary "image" | NTLFN issues - DOS386, 27.07.2010, 03:40