Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Look into correct PASV behaviour #439

Open
robklg opened this issue Oct 26, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

Look into correct PASV behaviour #439

robklg opened this issue Oct 26, 2022 · 0 comments

Comments

@robklg
Copy link
Contributor

robklg commented Oct 26, 2022

There are some behaviours around PASV that need looking into:

  • We accept multiple pasv commands (and open new passive ports each time) - do we want to close the previous listening port, or not accept the new command?
  • With the timeout on pasv that was added: when the passive listening timeout is reached, how are we supposed to behave according to the RFC? Should we return some 4xx in response to the command that was received too late? (LIST, STOR, RETR)
@robklg robklg changed the title Look into PASV Look into correct PASV behaviour Oct 26, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant