Hi,
>>> Mon, 07 Feb 2000 00:24:09 +0900 の刻に「shin」、すなわち
>>> Yoshinobu Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 氏曰く
shin> In non passive case,
. . .
shin> The 1st trial seems to be rejected at,
shin> 500 Illegal PORT range rejected.
shin> and 2nd trial seems to be accepted at,
shin> 200 pcmd command successful.
This problem was reported at [FreeBSD-users-jp 46521]. It is
Japanese FreeBSD mailing list.
In my experience, EPRT didn't fail in such case. I didn't
understand what you say. At last, I understand it. It's my
misunderstanding of my test environment.
I used NetBSD-current for FTP server. FreeBSD version of ftpd
checks the validity of PORT request for security reson by default.
EPRT request via NAT box is rejected by this check. But, NetBSD's
ftpd need `checkportcmd' options to behave as FreeBSD does, and I
didn't specified it. I think `ftpd -R' causes same situation.
shin> And then I tried passive mode.
ftp> passive
shin> Passive mode on.
ftp> dir
shin> 229 Entering Extended Passive Mode (|||1044|)
shin> ^C
shin> receive aborted
shin> waiting for remote to finish abort.
shin> The connection hanged at
shin> 229 Entering Extended Passive Mode (|||1044|)
shin> for a while, so I aborted it.
This is something strange. I still cannot understand why it
occures. It seems libalias does no additional thing for PASV. So, I
think, if EPSV isn't NAT friendly, PASV would also fail.
--
Hajimu UMEMOTO @ Internet Mutual Aid Society Yokohama, Japan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.imasy.org/~ume/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
