Windows 10: Windows 10 FTP issue copying files to remote server. They are placed with 0 bytes and...

I just purchased a new computer running Windows 10 Home and it's great. The only problem is that I can't get the FTP connection to my remote server working correctly with any program (WinSCP, FileZilla, etc.). On my older computer (Windows 8) using the exact same login information it works just fine. And the other people who access that same server report no difficulty.

On the new machine: SFTP to remote server works both with password and RSA key and passphrase. PuTTY works to provide shell access with no problem.

I'm able to navigate through folders in the WinSCP commander view, delete files, and make modifications to file properties.

The problem is that I can't place local files onto the server with drag and drop or by any other means.

Specific errors during upload attempt:
1. Server unexpectedly closed network connection.
2. Copying files to remote side failed.

I can try to reconnect, but it just loops continuously. It places a file with the same name and extension on the server but with 0 bytes (that I then have to log in to delete).

Can this be my Windows 10 configuration stopping the connection? I've tried to allow through firewall with dedicated rules. Even turned firewall off entirely. No luck.

The user logging in through WinSCP is the owner of all folders and files on the server. I've also tried logging in as root with same result.


I've run out things to try and am looking for help. Any ideas?

Thanks!

WinSCP log file shows:

. 2019-01-07 21:06:59.155 Copying "C:\[…]\file" to remote directory started.
. 2019-01-07 21:06:59.157 Binary transfer mode selected.
. 2019-01-07 21:06:59.157 Opening remote file.
> 2019-01-07 21:06:59.157 Type: SSH_FXP_OPEN, Size: 96, Number: 33539
< 2019-01-07 21:06:59.190 Type: SSH_FXP_HANDLE, Size: 13, Number: 33539
> 2019-01-07 21:06:59.190 Type: SSH_FXP_WRITE, Size: 1607, Number: 34054
> 2019-01-07 21:06:59.191 Type: SSH_FXP_CLOSE, Size: 13, Number: 34308
> 2019-01-07 21:06:59.191 Type: SSH_FXP_SETSTAT, Size: 92, Number: 33801
. 2019-01-07 21:06:59.234 Server unexpectedly closed network connection
. 2019-01-07 21:06:59.234 Connection was lost, asking what to do.
. 2019-01-07 21:06:59.234 Asking user:
. 2019-01-07 21:06:59.234 Server unexpectedly closed network connection. ()
* 2019-01-07 21:07:01.220 (ESshFatal) Server unexpectedly closed network connection.
* 2019-01-07 21:07:01.220 Copying files to remote side failed.

:)

 

FTP Server [With its own file Database] ?

I don't see a reason why the FTP needs to index the files before hand and not just read the directory when it is needed.

Of course the main reason against this is that any system like this wouldn't be up to date. Once the files system is indexed, if changes are made via something other than the FTP server itself the FTP server index would be outdate.

We see similar issues with Windows Indexing, a file can be deleted and it still shows up in the index, or a file can be created and it doesn't show up in the index.

Reading the actual file structure the moment it is requested insures that the file list is accurate, and really uses very little system resources.

 

FTP Server [With its own file Database] ?

Consider, if you would be running lefts 10-100 hard drive FTP. What happens, if for example user got for 'Folder A'

1. Hard drive has to power up because there is no cache
2. Hard drive has to read / list causes most of the problems for breaking hard drive.

^ Those 2 alone are reason to build hundreds of thousands costing softwares. So, why not simply caching code for FTP software.

To access File system index hardware has to be powered up = pretty big no no.
The FTP server index should be always out of date of course. timed checks only or manual update required to avoid bad copies from being added and generally it is good to know when newly added data would be in server instead of instant.

Yes, but I was referring that FTP Index should be working exactly like Windows Registry not like Windows Indexing. Directly on memory.

yes, this is true, but it fights everything I am searching for as index would read single location. reading 'on-site' would be hundreds of thousands of locations possibly which would raise every single hardware there would be in speed to do so.


-edit-

and on top of that I am testing here some of personal coding (trust me I suck at coding takes a lot even if I begin to try, hehe). Anyway, to build such database which would index would actually take less than 40 seconds for 300000 pictures with in 21000 folders structure. This list includes all nessessary information for <content>, Attributes, Size and could be shown clean out from server.

according to that calculation no matter how large the actual cache/index would be it would still be incredible fast and even this could be improved very very much considering with something like MySQL.

 

connection to a remote secure ftp server using windows 10 pro file explorer

I have to storage servers at home (ie. cloud servers). When at home I use my desktop to edit and maintain files on one or both storage servers. One is older and is available to the outside world through FTP. The other is newer and had my more protected
files and is available only via SFTP. To access my ftp server, I put ftp://w9dg.dyndns.org in my windows file explorer path bar and it prompts me for an ID and login. I can see all the ftp server files. My other server should be accessible through sftp://w9dg.dyndns.org.
I use port mapping to get me to the correct server.

With my android devices and an ftp program I can get to either server remotely from either my phone or Samsung tablet. I now have a Windows Surface Pro 3. I have remotely connected other computers using sftp://w9dg.dyndns.org in the address bar, but I
cannot on this Surface Pro 3. Is there a setting I need to turn on or a mapping procedure to connect remotely to my secure ftp server?

***Personal information deleted by the moderator. Please see the
Microsoft Community Frequently Asked Questions for more information on how you can protect your privacy.***