Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!agate!ucbvax!VENERA.ISI.EDU!braden
From: braden@VENERA.ISI.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re:  FTP "STRU VMS" extension
Message-ID: <8901311949.AA01381@braden.isi.edu>
Date: 31 Jan 89 19:49:22 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 26


	
	    I'm aware of the SITE command, but my understanding was that
	the SITE command was reserved for `non-standards', whereas this
	proposal would only be useful as an extension to the protocol. As I
	said above, I'm looking for more than just us to implement this.

Actually, the SITE command is intended for operating-system-specific
extensions.  It is the place I would have put (and DID put, in the UCLA
ACP in 1975) put such operating-system-specific extensions to FTP as
those you propose.  SITE provides a legal way to make system-specific
extensions without breaking the rest of the standard.  Of course, the
multiple vendors of network code for VMS should agree on the SITE
parameters for this purpose!
   ...
   
	    I'm not sure this is appropriate to involve the entire TCP-IP list
	in this discussion.  Anyone interested receiving copies of future
	correspondance, please send mail to stru-vms-request@tgv.com.
	
Actually, issues of interoperability and standards, vs. ad hoc protocol
extensions (nice word), seems like a very appropriate issue for this 
forum.

Bob Braden