Ftp-WG: in mlst-16, only Dos Eol excluded from pathnames?

> Subject: Ftp-WG: to mlst-16 from mlst-15

ftp://munnari.oz.au/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ftpext-mlst-16.txt.gz

> = 2.2. Pathnames
> ...
> + Note: for pathnames transferred over a data
> + connection, there is no way to represent a
> + pathname containing the characters CR and LF in
> + sequence, and distinguish that from the end of
> + line indication.

This is a clear, limited statement, thank you.

Am I correct to think this says, by omission, that
there is a correct protocol for the transmission, by
control and data connection, of filenames that contain
LF, or CR, or LF CR, just not CR LF?  We exclude only
CR LF, aka the MS Dos Eol, aka the Telnet Eol.  We do
not exclude the isolated LF aka Unix Eol.  We do not
exclude the isolated CR aka Mac Eol.  We do not
exclude mixtures thereof, except for CR followed
directly by LF.

> > there is a correct protocol

And someone on Earth knows what that protocol is?

> > there is a correct protocol

And we don't think exercising that protocol would in
fact confuse most actual Ftp clients, Ftp servers, and
Ftp firewalls?

Curiously yours, thanks in advance, Pat LaVarre

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com