ioFTPD v7.7.3 (STABLE) Released - Page 12

o_dog · 01-04-2012, 05:11 PM

it shoudln't be. I could probably modify the return codes if it's needed. But a crc error is not really an error. It means the file is corrupt, that the transfer failed or that it's incomplete on source.

CRC errors can be ioNiNJAS fault since it compares it with the sfv file. And alot of people jsut have to screw things up by leaving crap in there thats not needed.

Tuffal_Simon · 01-21-2012, 06:18 AM

Apr 26, 2011 â UPDATE: v7.7.2 (it must be .2) appears really stable. So far nobody has reported any crashes and the few sites I can see all have nice uptimes. 5 years has passed - is ioFTPD still worth using ?? - Aug 12, 2011 ioFTPD leech issue? - Ap

Yil · 01-22-2012, 03:45 AM

A quick update. I started playing with C# and WPF a bit around Christmas as I wanted to learn the language. I haven't done a lot with it yet, but I can see why people find it easy to use. Figuring I knew enough I decided to write the C# shared memory library for the scripters out there. Unfortunately I found out that there are a lot of subtle details C# just glosses over if you are only writing pure managed code... I think I've got a handle on things now as the library can make simple shared memory requests to the server, but I've still got to implement all the possible calls and do a lot of cleanup though. I'm also trying to make the API an interface so in the future you could connect to the server over an FTP login and perform the same operations which would allow remote administration. Something similar to how ioGUI offers you the option of how to communicate with the server now.

After the C# shared memory library exposes the current functionality I'll probably go ahead and implement a whole lot more functions and/or an entirely new interface under the covers to help catch it up to functionality that TCL currently has access to. I believe things like path resolving, querying the active mountfile, etc are all things that a script is likely to need to do and I think it's better to have the server do it than each scripter write their own routines to try and mimic the server, parse server config files, etc...

ArtX · 01-22-2012, 05:06 AM

so 2012 is going to be the year of ioftpd v8?

Ullman · 01-30-2012, 11:54 AM

Is there a list of clients that are allowed to connect to the ioFTPD server or what could be the cause of getting the following in my Error.log-file:

Quote:

Rejected unmatched client 70.62.#.#

I've searched the forum and found a thread for the ioFTPD v6.3.5 Beta release but it didn't turn up much info on what was the exact cause or how it was solved.

I myself use FlashFXP and another user also uses FlashFXP but the one who keeps getting the rejected entry uses FileZilla (since it's free). Is there a certain way an ftp-client should connect to ioFTPD or?

I've got the log printout from the user with FileZilla and it is as follows:

Quote:

Status: Connecting to 1.2.3.4:9000...

Status: Connection established, waiting for welcome message...

Error: Could not connect to server

Cheers!

Yil · 01-31-2012, 12:42 AM

Ullman: You have enabled the 'Reject_Unknown_Ips' option in the .ini file and the IP/hostname of the user trying to connect doesn't match ANY hostmask across ALL the users so the server won't talk to him.

You can probably verify this using the 'site findip <IP>' and then 'site findip <hostname>' option which won't return any matching user hostmasks.

Of course the solution is simple, just add a new hostmask to the user

Ullman · 01-31-2012, 05:17 AM

Yil: I did use the site findip 70.62.254.254 to see all users that has that IP range and the only user that came up was the one who couldn't connect

I did add the following IP to that user: *@70.62.*.* but it didn't seem to solve the problem right away

Just thinking out loud

is there a delay for when I update a users profile for instance adding a new IP to a user and he/she can't connect right away? Could ioftpd cache all the user profiles and then update the cache after a while or is it done instantly? Or does it write the changes to that users profile and then when they try to connect it checks the user profile?

Many thoughts hehe hope you could follow what I was thinking otherwise I guess I'll have to explain a bit better

Cheers!

Yil · 01-31-2012, 03:05 PM

That's weird. Updates are applied immediately so that shouldn't be it. Try a 'site rehash' which should rebuild everything. If that fails you could also try restarting the server just to see if that fixes things...

On the other hand, make sure you aren't chasing two different problems. Check 'site bans list' to make sure the user hasn't auto-banned themselves.

Double check that the logfile is reporting the same rejected IP address just in case their IP changed on them as well.

Ullman · 01-31-2012, 05:24 PM

Unfortunately their IP hasn't changed between connects, and no user has been banned...

Yes the changes should be auto-updated, but thats whats strange since it happened today to another user who had a new IP I added the new IP but the user had to wait around 5-6 minutes before they could connect successfully.

I did a site config rehash but might have to try that site rehash instead

Haven't tested to restart the server, but I have to wait and see if I stumble upon another IP change if that might fix the problem

Cheers!

o_dog · 02-24-2012, 08:18 AM

nevermind. New settign i forgot to add on update

Yil · 02-28-2012, 04:07 PM

Hmm, not sure when it happened, but it appears that I broke dynamic DNS hostname supports in user hostmasks. Thus things like :ident@name.no-ip.org won't work for the moment. I guess nobody is using this feature which I believe is unique to ioFTPD. I think it's pretty handy in those rare cases where users have a crazy range of IPs they could be assigned.

mr.babek · 03-16-2012, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yil

Hmm, not sure when it happened, but it appears that I broke dynamic DNS hostname supports in user hostmasks. Thus things like :ident@name.no-ip.org won't work for the moment. I guess nobody is using this feature which I believe is unique to ioFTPD. I think it's pretty handy in those rare cases where users have a crazy range of IPs they could be assigned.

Some of my users requested to add their ip by dns , sinces it didnt work I guessed it wasn't implemented at all

Yil · 03-22-2012, 06:33 PM

o_dog: Testing shows another issue that will be of interest to scripters. It's starting to look like a script that runs longer than the idle timeout on a non-exempt user will end up returning a script failure message and be disconnected when the script finally finishes. This probably only matters for things like 'site rescan all' on a big directory since the default idle timeout of 6 minutes is pretty long for a script to be running. Idle exempt users won't trigger this which is probably why I never noticed it before

I've duplicated the result, but haven't confirmed the exact problem but thought I'd mention it so you can make sure you test your script with an idle exempt user since this wouldn't be a bug in your script that you need to find.

o_dog · 03-25-2012, 05:08 PM

nah, if you run it with a master account and your client does not disconnect it shouldn't stop the script as long as it sends something to ioftpd every now and then.

mr-b · 04-09-2012, 12:34 PM

Yil, is there any way to get around MAX_PATH? I am hitting directory/filename length limits and it's very annoying. Does ioFTPD need to abide by the limits of the Windows API cuz NTFS can support longer? Maybe it is the TCL scripts that are truely limited, I haven't tested without them.