I agree. I think the data channel of the FTP need to be blocked, other agreement or channel intact.


In fact, there is another kind of solutions, is the FTP of the data channel also like a control channel as a polling mechanism, but this method requires more detailed.‍





------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------
发件人: "Daniel Stenberg";<daniel_at_haxx.se>;
发送时间: 2015年1月22日(星期四) 凌晨5:56
收件人: "libcurl development"<curl-library_at_cool.haxx.se>;

主题: Re: 回复：FTPS:Another reason,failed to access FTPS through a HTTP proxy server(v7.40.0)



On Mon, 19 Jan 2015, 无有先生 wrote:

> Annex I amendments, please check.‍‍

Thanks! I now completely realize why we need this fix - since the FTP code
doesn't properly deal with the CONNECT handling done non-blocking it has to do
the whole thing at once.

But I'm not too fond of this way of fixing it, as it is not made clear
anywhere that it will act differently depending on which socket index that is
passed in.

I would prefer a new argument to the function, like 'allow_early' or similar,
that would be set and not set depending on if the caller can handle that.

What do you think?

--

  / daniel.haxx.se

-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library
Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
Received on 2015-01-22