[FEATURE REQUEST] PRET support

[SydneyGuy]

The last post in this thread was well over a year ago but it looks like there is still no support for PRET in the latest release. I think I read in another post that the main developer could do it easily but wont because there is no RFC for it. I guess there still isn't. Given FileZilla is open source I wonder if someone else had added PRET support somewhere???

I've been using FileZilla to access an FTP server that someone has graciously given me access to. All has been fine as the machine I have been using was directly connected to the Internet and therefore it would happily work in Active mode. But some upcoming network changes will mean I will have to change to PASV mode and this wont work with FileZilla as the server requires PRET when using PASV. Grrrrrrr.

Over the weekend I tried a few other clients but all seem to fall short of FileZilla's ease of use, features and of course you can't beat the cost of FileZilla. Quite a few support PRET but wont allow simultaneous downloads from the same server. FileZilla does this well. I'm currently testing SmartFTP and it looks like it will do everything I need but it's going to cost me US$37 (about 635389595 Australian dollars these days ) to continue using it.

So what's the latest with FileZilla supporting PRET? Is it likely or should I fork out my cash for SmartFTP?

[botg]

A proper server does not need PRET. PRET is in violation of the FTP specifications.

[SydneyGuy]

Yes I have read that many times in this forum. I'll bow to your greater knowledge and agree with you but the simple fact of the matter is that may servers, and specifically the one I have access to, do require it and therefore require a client that supports it. If it was my server I'd look at running something more standard but I have no influence on someone that runs a server on the other side of the world. I'm sure most users of servers that require PRET are in the same situation.

It's almost like it has become a religious argument. Does it really need to be? If the stance remains that you wont support it then I'll just have to fork out for SmartFTP as the trial version I have of that is working perfectly. Of course I would rather not have to spend A$60 on it if I don't have to.

[SydneyGuy]

Just to finalise this .... can I take it that PRET support wont be included in FileZilla any time soon? If not then I will go and place my order for SmartFTP. I just don't want to fork out for that and then find that FileZilla supports it a few days later.

[boco]

Just to finalise this .... can I take it that PRET support wont be included in FileZilla any time soon?

Unless there is a formal specification for PRET, unlikely.

[SydneyGuy]

As it turns out the requirement is no longer needed. I was made redundant by my employer today after 10 years of service and the PRET requirement was only for accessing sites from work. Here at home I have port forwarding setup so I can use active mode rather than passive and therefore FileZilla works fine. So I can save the money I was going to have to spend on SmartFTP especially now that I have no income

[morningboat]

If needed, you can check a list of FTP clients that support FTP PRET function at http://www.drftpd.org/index.php/Clients ... ET_support

[redfox_]

And here are (finally) the specifications:

http://www.drftpd.org/index.php/PRET_Specifications

Looking forward to have PRET builtin within the next fz release!

[botg]

That's a list of examples, not a formal specification. Also PRET breaks EPSV and is inconsistent with itself.

[boco]

The PRET topic seems to attract a lot of spammers. Closing it now.