Talk:List of file transfer protocols
V.92, V.90, etc are not serial protocols; they are modem protocols, allowing digital communications over analog phone lines. It is perfectly feasible to use ZMODEM et al without modems. I'm reverting, since it would be inaccurate to call V.92 a serial protocol. Rhobite 21:04, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)
- I was not using the term "serial" in the sense of a serial port connection, but rather in contrast to non-serial (i.e., sequential) protocols schemes such as TCP/IP in which packets do not necessarily need to be received in sequence. I acknowledge that protocols like ZMODEM do not require a modem, but to take your logic even further, modems do not necessarily require an RS-232 connection. If you are intent on clarifying the article (and I do not dispute that it needs clarification) there is surely a better way than by referring to RS-232. —Psychonaut 21:12, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- But most implementations of ZMODEM, YMODEM etc only work over RS-232, and most modems use RS-232 to communicate with the PC. I guess you're right, winmodems don't use RS-232 although I think they emulate this layer for compatibility. I guess we shouldn't mention RS-232 or V.92 or anything, since they're not true in all cases. Although I think it's OK since it says they "typically operate across RS-232", not "always". Rhobite 21:18, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)
Commentary and comparisons
On the Talk:File Transfer Protocol page is this, which is relevant here:
- So why FTP?
- Reading this article, I had one goal in mind: to figure out what advantages FTP has over HTTP. I didn't see any. Perhaps these could be added? —Simetrical (talk) 02:17, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This Protocols for file transfer article seems like an appropriate place for that kind of information. Which of these protocols are commonly used, and when would one be used over another? -R. S. Shaw 21:24, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
is this a non-english name?
"Protocols for file transfer"? Ummm, shouldn't this be "file transfer protocol"? For one, you're not supposed to use plurals in names. For another, it just sounds wrong, like a non-english speaker originated the article. I'm going to move unless anyone objects. Maury 00:34, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- No, it's English, and there's history behind it. The first thing you should note is that file transfer protocol already exists. It is a redirect leading not to this article but to File Transfer Protocol which describes a particular protocol (commonly referred to as FTP). This article covers many different ones, only one of which is FTP. So, it shouldn't be named "file transfer protocol".
- Given what it is, maybe this article should be named "List of protocols for file transfer" or "List of file transfer protocols" either of which follows the precedent described in Wikipedia:Lists (stand-alone lists). -R. S. Shaw 04:32, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
The individual messages transferred by the Network News Transfer Protocol could be considered "files". Is NNTP a kind of file transfer protocol? If not, what kind of protocol is it? Many people sent files as email attachments. Should we include NNTP and SMTP as a kind of "file protocol"? If there is some other article (named what?) that lists these other kinds of protocols, perhaps we should just say "files are also often sent using protocols listed on the ___ list". --188.8.131.52 20:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
FTAM is listed under heading "Primarily used with TCP/IP". That isn't really accurate. FTAM can be used over TCP/IP (via RFC1006), but in practice it was much more commonly used over X.25 instead.184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:37, 28 December 2014 (UTC)