[Fixed] RaidenFTPD <=> ioFTPD

[darkone]

Lately this has been one of the hottest topic. So here's brief explanation of the problem:

ioFTPD uses graceful shutdown, which is described in msdn article:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/winsock/winsock/graceful_shutdown_linger_options_and_socket_closur e_2.asp

use quote to get the url.. vbulletin doesn't seem to like urls this long :)

It means that after send operation, ioFTPD will wait until it receives FD_CLOSE from client (which is sent by client by issuing shutdown(socket, SD_SEND); closesocket() does not issue shutdown!). If FD_CLOSE, is not received, it (io) will wait until socket times out (hardcoded to 600seconds), or socket layer notifies it for inproper pipe closure.

Now why isn't ioftpd using the ordinary solution, and leaving close notification managment to kernel/winsock: it all comes down to one thing, scalability. This implementation allows ioftpd to have total control over socket buffers. And trust me, it's needed when there are several hundreds, or even thousands of connnections. (current build of ioftpd can handle up to 1024 connections... and it can do it without problems... that's what scalability is all about :))

Here is a short example, how graceful shutdown should be done, when lingering is disabled:

1) send(socket, ...);
2) recv(socket, ...);
1) shutdown(socket, SD_SEND); // end of send operation
1) recv(socket, ...); // waits for 0
2) recv(socket, ...); // returns 0
2) shutdown(socket, SD_BOTH); // end of receive operation
2) closesocket(socket);
1) ... recv returns 0
1) shutdown(socket, SD_RECV);
1) closesocket(socket);

easy, uhh?

[MaistroX]

Oki, now we ALL understand ;) , but why does it seem to work from ioFTPD to most other deamons of FTPD´s and NOT to/from RaidenFTPD ?


As for me I dont care, but think alot of other folks wonder ! :)

[darkone]

I have this super-secret raiden detector to kill the competition ;) no really.. we're both competing from different kinds of users: io aims for maximal performance, under extremely heavy loads. (using io, with < 100connections, is waste of my time ;)) It features everything you can read from msdn; command queus, job queues, timer queues, disk access queues, socket queues.... almost everything is done using the optimal solution under NT-platform (only os buffering for sockets & disk access haven't been disabled... but I'm working on solutions to disable them too ;p I want to get max user count on io server to ~10k)

[Mouton]

Originally posted by MaistroX
Oki, now we ALL understand ;) , but why does it seem to work from ioFTPD to most other deamons of FTPD´s and NOT to/from RaidenFTPD ?Raiden doesn't send the signal to tell the other side that the send is done: shutdown(socket, SD_SEND)

So the other side waits undefinitively for that signal, and finally timeout waiting for it. This happens with ioFTPD and ProFTPD, both of which expect to receive that signal. Other ftpd are lazy, and don't expect that signal. They just assume it.

[thewarden]

I understand the aim for total performance to be as best as possible...as I strive for that performance as well.

BUT - as there always is one

When you compare a main stream solution for such tasks, the flip
side to this is not where "many" of your end users will be now,
nor anytime in the near future.

Not when the average home based site is on simple home based
solutions that are mainly based on COST. They would not use
such power. Even now at 1024 connections, that is impressive,
but overall, how many sites would even come close to that useage?


If you want ~10K - and I see your point.


BUT - another one here

Most home based and just above that (this is where the "MANY")
come into play - have to deal with others running RAIDEN.

Lets face facts here, unless the other guy changes, and we know
that will not take place...as each and every topic on this is some
how deleted on that support forum.


Maybe a poll would tell you want the end user wants, and then
you can see if it is worth the effort to either code 2 versions or
put a fix in...if this is even possible.

And then cost the versions accordingly

- power version ~10K
- home based version able to use raiden type ftpds

At least then you can cover all areas and trial it for a few months
to see if the "R" versions pick up based on such platform choice.

TW

[Zer0Racer]

There is nothing wrong in aiming for 10k connections and super-high performance. It doesn't perform any slower with 100 connections or with 10 connections.

And I really don't think ioFTPD has to work other way than RFC compliance just because other ftpds don't follow the standard(s). ioFTPD works just like it's supposed to, some others don't.

[Unique]

Originally posted by thewarden
I understand the aim for total performance to be as best as possible...as I strive for that performance as well.
blahblih MOOOOooooOOo...
TW


With such reasoning you might as well stick to raiden.
Its good for home users who like no stability nor performance and its so great!

Let d1 do what hes best at, making a great ftpd.
I frankly dont give a **** if some lame ass n00b ftpd like raiden doesnt work with ioftpd.
Raiden isnt even in the same league anymore, its like comparing a trabant with a ferrari. Logically you cant race with them both on the same race track without one breaking down trying to catch up desperately.

[Zer0Racer]

That's one way of putting it.

[thewarden]

Unique -

With thinking like that - it is nothing more that what I expect
from PRO and ANTI people who have closed minds.

Exactly what is the problem with asking DARKONE for other
possible choices. Asking is causing no harm and he has the
final say on any question asked - NOT YOU

So QUOTE " blahblih MoooooooOOoo " all you want KIDDIE as
that is how your reply comes across - A spolied brat!

And as far as racing - your logic in this is not really a good one,
as I'm sure you never heard of restrictor racing? Where you
have a choice of LIMITING your power so you can reap the
benifits from all - the end result is you have a choice running
with total all out power, or reduce your power to run with the
lesser group.

[thewarden]

Zer0Racer -

I stated that - nothing wrong at all with that and I strive for it as
well, as in that message.

All I stated was that most people would not use that power
and that is the truth...

I did not say IO should run like raiden, please quote that - I
stated maybe there can be a choice...what is wrong with that?

If people don't ask with at least some reasoning with their
question - there is no need to ask in the first place.

And you as well know that what I said is the truth, most buyers
of IO or RAIDEN will never come close to having a main stream
solutions running out their homes.

It is just unfortunate that the 2 top dogs don't get along...and
that is stated in the first message - is a hot topic.

WE KNOW RAIDEN WILL NOT CHANGE!

Just maybe, by asking here - JUST A HUGE MAYBE, but unless
asked...we will never know - that JUST MAYBE...Darkone could
have a CHOICE on it....but that is his choice.

So I asked...


And that is one way of putting it = SIMPLY ASKED!

No where did I DEMAND or SUGGEST IO change - I ASKED FOR
A POSSIBLE CHOICE - a choice some people may want to make
for themselves IF that choice was there.

[Rudenstam]

yeah.. lets cap io's power so it can race with raiden and the others.. :)

[Unique]

Originally posted by thewarden
Unique -
With thinking like that - it is nothing more that what I expect
from PRO and ANTI people who have closed minds.
... all you want KIDDIE as
that is how your reply comes across - A spolied brat!...


Many thanks for calling me a spoiled kid with a closed mind.
Talking about childish behaviour..

"sure you never heard of restrictor racing?" frankly i dont no. Happy now?

"WE KNOW RAIDEN WILL NOT CHANGE!"
Maybe its time to dump raiden then and search a program that actually works.
Oh yea nice CAPS problem you have too.. or were you trying to impress us with your screaming.... either way its retarted.

Maybe d1 can "fix" this problem, question is if thats a good idea.
RFC Rules aint there for nothing...
What if in the future another thing aint working with raiden, io has to "fix" it again? Its gonne be an endless tunnel like this, especially with all the bugs raiden has.

Greetings,
UNi

[megauser]

Has gotten way off topic, Lets try to focus on ioFTPD and not R****n please....

D1 isnt going to be making any product that trys to look like the other guys.. its not what he is doing this for, he has a GREAT platform and idea to make a killer ftpd.

The Development around ioFTPD is astounding btw. I for one use R****** for almost 4 years, til this one became stable enough to use in production and I isntantly switched, after Paying the fee of course :), my site is about 3 TB is size too.. so I didn't make this move just to see if it worked... I wanted a solution that was long term!

$10 is CHEAP for a product of this caliber and development, its worth is 10x more.

So.... sorry to be a burden on everyone here, but I just needed to get that off my chest. Darkone is doing a killer job here putting this out, he is doing it based on standards (which in my book speaks alot) to the integrety of the guy!

Megauser

[thewarden]

Ok, stand corrected - I am not one to give others excuses when
I'm wrong...that much I give too myself.

BUT - I will not now or in the future "NOT" ask for choices, be them
correct ones, or ones people may not like.

And I reply as I am replied too - you get what you give, and that
is best understood.

TW


By the way - I am 1001% for IO to continue on as it is and even
get far better than the others. that I want to make clear - else,
why would I or even others make good or dumb suggestions if
not wanting to see IO continue on.

[thewarden]

megauser -

Has gotten way off topic, Lets try to focus on ioFTPD and not R****n please....

- agreed, I am a bad boy for brining in the other ftpd

The Development around ioFTPD is astounding btw.

- agreed again, as I paid for (after leaving GLFTP) to go to MS the
ftpd's of G6, SERV-U, RAIDEN, IO - all of them...as one got better
and one made more "CHOICES" for me to use so I could give the
best to those that support my site...and I will be upfront here, if
another one comes along better than IO - I will buy and test that
one as well. If better, bye bye IO just like bye bye raiden...just
like the many other 100's who have did that themselves by
jumping to IO from what they USE to use.

I am not a so called "FAN BOY" of any one program and I will
never be, BUT I will support what I use...and I will continue to
leave messages of possible choices or suggestions, be them
good or dumb ones, as I paid for the right to do so by
SUPPORTING the program by paying the fee asked for it.

In the end, only the coder can say YES or NO, or if possible picked
up by 3rd party scripters on any idea left...as we have seen time
and time again on any ftpd that is robust enough to allow
scripters the freedom to code for it.



$10 is CHEAP

- agreed again ... the cost of IO and what it offers is about the
best deal going now...ex: the so called choice of BW control that
was the long awaited CHOICE of useage - but there are many
like myself who paid for IO while not using it until certain
CHOICES came into the ftpd and as I hoped and they did or are
in the topics to do list. 10.00 is a hell of a bargan even to pay
out inadvance while not using the ftpd...but the main item I LIKED
HERE OVER ALL OTHERS = Choices are OK to ask for and
CENSORSHIP is not a word USED HERE.

Some choices should not be asked, but hey...unless asked you
will never know...but at least you see the topic being discussed
by the people - and not RULED OVER :)

That alone is worth the 10.00 !!!


TW

[[mRg]]

Hi there,

Just to add a little note to this problem .. I have tried raising this issue on the RaidenFTPD forum only to find that..

a> the word IOFTPD is replaced with [censored] in a very childish manner. :(

b> after about 2 hours the post was completely deleted with no word about why but probably to hide this problem (I only hope some people read the post before it was removed)

I have really liked and recommended Raiden over the years (It was one of the only pieces of software that I have actually ever paid for) and I had a bunch of very personalised Perl scripts which i lovingly crafted over many months.

This sheer childishness and inablity to admit this problem (and a few other problems I have had in the past) has meant that you guys will be receiving some money from me very shortly and I will have to find a way to convert these scripts over to IO :) They have sucessfully driven away a loyal customer.

Please excuse the ranting .. I just hope that IO will be my new choice for windows FTPD software from here on in :D

Regards

[mRg]

(any links for tutorials on script writting for IO are very welcome !)

[Superblue]

Dark: Would it be possible to have a raiden compatility mode where socket close would not be waited for, or to give us a way to adjust socket close timeout to make things more efficient?

As for me I have built a new box and put glftpd on it to use for my ftp site (tranfer speeds are 2+ times faster on this 700mhz linux box than my 2.5ghz p4 but hey whatever.) I am still using ioftpd on my comp for a personal server to transfer stuff back and forth from my home PC though. I just hate to see so many people turn away from what looks to be a very promising solution over such a small problem.

[Mouton]

Breaking standars to be able to work with ftpd that doesn't follow standards isn't really a good idea.

Doing thing the right way is a good idea.

[Mr_X]

I have an idea: why don't send a command before fxping between a raiden and a io? User have to send a command to say that is raiden and it has to use the "bad" method to close thread. What do you think of that?

[Harm]

You want to create a whole new standard to support only one ftpd that doesn't follow them ?

[Mr_X]

no, just have an alternate routine when fxping between raiden and io (If the user send the command to specify that he is fxping from/to a raiden and that io have to use alternate method)

[neoxed]

Originally posted by Mr_X
no, just have an alternate routine when fxping between raiden and io (If the user send the command to specify that he is fxping from/to a raiden and that io have to use alternate method)

That would also require a special client.

And RaidenFTPD is _not_ worth the effort.

[thewarden]

I went throught this a week or two ago.

*** It's not the fact if RAIDEN is worth the effort or not.

It's the fact that some sites do use Raiden and that is that.

As well as what your own user base uses as a site to site xfer.

The only point here is one item at this time:

Use 1 or the other - but that is not a solution nor fix for SysOps
and not their end users.

---
The only fix is a 3rd name which is compatible with both, and that
name is older than both IO and Raiden and works with both quite
fine...
---

So, sites like mine who were waitng for the BW control, now have
to wait once again until this current nonsense has calmed down
on the part of ftpd's and as well as clients going through some
teething problems on who will end up with the biggest chomp!

There is ALWAYS a way around a problem...until things calm down.

TW

[Mouton]

I think you ppl miss the point here.

ioFTPD do things the right way, the way it should do things.
It's optimized to do things right and fast.
Making things any other way than that would make no sense to ioftpd developer (dark).
Dark works very hard to make his server performant and stable.
Changing the way ioftpd works to make it work with a ftpd that doesn't follow ftp/tcp standards makes no sense whatsoever.

Stop asking for it. ioFTPD won't lessen it's performance just to accomodate bad ftpd implementations.

End of story.

[wvGrandja]

If i am not mistakaken, in later builds of raiden this problem has been fixed. Here is a quote from raiden forum:
Version 2.4 build 999 : fixed: FXP problem with ProFTPD 1.28
when i saw this i got very curious, i stared up a raiden server (pre build 999) and fxp'd to it. The problem occured. Then i updated the raiden server to teh latest build, and the transfers went smooth.

[Mouton]

yep, that solved the io to raiden issue.
case closed.