FTP SSL Implicit or Explicit

There appears to be some contention regarding the definitions of Implicit and Explicit SSL FTP in the Opus documentation. This source,

http://help.globalscape.com/help/secureserver2/Explicit_versus_implicit_SS.htm

among others seems to contradict the Opus docs' definition. Any comments on this confusing but important fine point?

Regards,
Jon

Sorry. Exactly what is your point here? Opus provides both Implicit and Explicit SSL plus SFTP over SSH.

The descriptions of Explicit and Implicit in the Opus manual are the reverse of the descriptions in the URL above. One of them must have it the wrong way around.

gpsoft.com.au/manual/WebHelp ... hanced.htm

[quote]Implicit means the client (Opus) issues an AUTH command and asks for an SSL connection.

Explicit means the client assumes the server is running an SSL connection on port 990 and attempts to immediately open a connection (for example, as used by the excellent FTP server, Serv-U). Normally, implicit connections are recommended.[/quote]

help.globalscape.com/help/secure ... cit_SS.htm

[quote]Explicit Security: In order to establish the SSL link, explicit security requires that the FTP client issue a specific command to the FTP server after establishing a connection. The default FTP server port is used. This formal method is documented in RFC 2228.

Implicit Security: Implicit security automatically begins with an SSL connection as soon as the FTP client connects to an FTP server. In implicit security, the FTP server defines a specific port for the client (990) to be used for secure connections.[/quote]
Or are they consistent? My head hurts too much right now, but I think those are the relevant parts of the two things. If they do contradict each other the question is then whether the drop-down in the FTP site list is the right way around.

If something is "Implicit" it is implied or taken for granted. If something is "Explicit", it is stated in detail.

The Opus description above is incorrect. I'm not sure about the dialog itself though.

ah OK. Yes it looks like a typo in the text. I'll update it.

Thanks.