1998-05-25-19:13:49 Laris Benkis: > We have a system in place where clients drop off files via FTP to a > wu-ftp server which are then processed automatically by scripts. Files > have to be processed relatively quickly for the application to work > properly therefore the convention we have developed is to indicate end > of transmission by doing a rename of the file once the initial put is done. That's an approach I hadn't thought of. Cool! > We are trying to tighten the security of the whole process and want to > use FW1 ftp resources to limit where puts can be done. Unfortunately it > turns out that when the ftp resources are used it is no longer possible to > do rename. So you're gonna have to change the client behavior for sure --- unless the client code implementation currently ignores the errors the failing rename attept produces. > What is a reliable, transparent way to tell that an ftp transmission has > been completed? A question I've pondered before --- having done the same kind o' stuff, ftp-ing files into a directory where they were then automatically processed. > We have a fallback solution where the client would send a file then > send a second delimiter file to indicate that the transmission of the > first file is complete. That's what I ended up doing. But I just had another idea hit me --- wu-ftpd has highly-configurable logging, it's easy to get it to log every transfer. So do so, and then bolt a log-watcher on, and let the appearance of the log message describing the completed transfer trigger the spool file processor. -Bennett
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 13:00:07 PDT