Re: [Gafd-users] afd failure from an empty directory

[Holger K. <Hol...@dw...>]

Hello Ron

On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Ronald Smith wrote:

> On Wednesday, 30. August 2006 10:26, Holger Kiehl wrote:
>> Hello Ron
>>
>> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006, Ronald Smith wrote:
>>> Hello Holger,
>>>
>>> On an operational system recently we moved from one source server  (Suse
>>> linux, SLES-8) to another (SLES-10). The afd (1.3.3) failed to cooperate
>>> with the new server. A connect field (dark blue) showed in the GUI, which
>>> turned red after a timeout (set to 180m secs), and an error appeared in
>>> the log. Retries were never effective and just increased the error count.
> <cut>
>>> Looking for differences between the old and the new configurations, we
>>> thought that the new server was only giving problems when the source
>>> directories were empty. We put a dummy file (which did not match the AFD
>>> search mask) into each source directory, clicked 'retry' and everything
>>> worked! This is our workaround at the moment.
>
>
> I'd like to ask again on this one, Holger!
>
> It's now become clear that our old server (proftpd 1.2.10) gave the following
> for an empty directory
>
> ftp> nlist
> 200 PORT command successful
> 450 No files found
> ftp>
>
> but the new server (proftpd 1.3.0) gives for an empty directory.
>
> ftp> nlist
> 200 PORT command successful
> 226 Transfer complete.
> ftp>
>
> Surely the new ftp return code is a better match to the situation. (I remember
> some time ago we had a problem with code 450 - given for empty source
> directories - being interpreted as a warning or error by the afd.)
> But is the AFD handling code 226 correctly?
>
Yes.

There is more then just the 200 and 226. Your client hides this and this is
the important part. See the trace that you have send, the server responce
to the NLST command was 125 (or 150) which is correct and then sends the
listing, after the listing (even when empty) it sends the 226. And this
is how it should be.

As I mentioned in my first reply, the trace you have send me shows no
error and AFD does not complain. The error message that shows an error
says the connection has received a timeout. And the time at which this
occured was at midnight, so I assume that the problem lies somewhere else.
It might be helpful to see a trace when it fails.

Regards,
Holger