Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FTP upload fails in BC3, works in BC2

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • FTP upload fails in BC3, works in BC2

    I first reported this problem via e-mail around Cirrus build 442.

    When I upload a file to an FTP site via BC2, it is successful:
    FTP_BC2.png

    However, when I upload the same file to the same FTP site using Cirrus, it fails:
    FTP_BC3.png

    These results occur on an XP SP2 laptop connected to the Internet over a wireless DSL connection.

    Using the same laptop over the same wireless connection, if I establish a VPN connection to my employer's Intranet and upload the same file to the same FTP site through my employer's firewall (using a proxy server username and password), the upload is successful.

    I don't understand why the upload works in BC2 but fails in Cirrus without a VPN connection, and works in both products over a VPN connection. I sent copies of my Cirrus configuration files to Aaron Polans, and he was unable to repro my problem. I would appreciate assistance in trouble-shooting this issue.
    BC v4.0.7 build 19761
    ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

  • #2
    I'm not sure why, but BC3 FTP uploads started working again in build 451.
    The change log shows some FTP bug fixes in build 450. Perhaps one of them fixed my problem as well.
    BC v4.0.7 build 19761
    ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

    Comment


    • #3
      I spoke too soon. The problem still exists... (See screencast). I must have had an active VPN connection when I tried it earlier today.

      Again, BC2 does not have this problem, only BC3..
      Last edited by Michael Bulgrien; 11-Apr-2008, 12:07 AM.
      BC v4.0.7 build 19761
      ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

      Comment


      • #4
        Michael, I'm curious which FTP server it is and is it plain FTP (not SFTP or FTPS)? Active or Passive FTP?

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks, Pete, for your questions.

          My connection is a regular FTP server (UNIX type: L8) not SFTP or FTPS.

          I don't remember changing the Passive setting, but I did compare BC2 with BC3. BC2 was not set as Passive, but BC3 was. I unchecked the Passive setting in BC3 and the problem went away.

          I must have checked the Passive setting in Cirrus during past FTP testing and forgot about it. I am assuming that the default setting is the same for BC2 and BC3 (namely the Passive setting unchecked). At least I hope they are...
          BC v4.0.7 build 19761
          ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

          Comment


          • #6
            The default transfer type was changed to Passive in BC3.
            Zoë P Scooter Software

            Comment


            • #7
              Well, that explains it... Just curious... why was the default changed? I wonder how many other users will hit FTP sites that do not work simply because the defaults have changed. This was really frustrating for me... and none of the Scooter team mentioned the change to the defaults nor suggested that I check the Passive setting to trouble-shoot this issue.
              BC v4.0.7 build 19761
              ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

              Comment


              • #8
                As far as I can tell most web browsers use passive mode by default, and it works better with most firewalls. I didn't recommend changing the setting because the behavior you described isn't what I would have expected from a server doesn't support passive transfers. If history is any indicator I'm sure there are going to be plenty of users who contact us about the new default, just like there were for the old one. I just think there will be fewer this way.
                Zoë P Scooter Software

                Comment


                • #9
                  I enabled passive transfers in BC2 and the attempted upload just hung with no obvious activity taking place...which makes it rather obvious that a user might need to tweak the FTP settings.

                  In BC3 lots of activity occurs...which confuses the issue somewhat (please review the screencast I've provided). Is there any way that such a failure (as demonstrated in the screencast) might be trapped somehow and the user given a more meaningful error message with a suggestion of what might be wrong?
                  BC v4.0.7 build 19761
                  ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X