On Oct 19, 2014 12:46 AM, "John-Mark Gurney" <j...@funkthat.com> wrote: > > Freddie Cash wrote this message on Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:21 -0700: > > On Oct 18, 2014 3:54 AM, "Mark Martinec" <mark.martinec+free...@ijs.si> > > wrote: > > > > > > If the purpose of having a none cipher is to have a fast > > > file transfer, then one should be using sysutils/bbcp > > > for that purposes. Uses ssd for authentication, and > > > opens unencrypted channel(s) for the actual data transfer. > > > It's also very fast, can use multiple TCP streams. > > > > That's an interesting alternative to rsync, scp, and ftp, but doesn't help > > with zfs send/recv which is where the none cipher really shines. > > > > Without the none cipher, SSH becomes the bottleneck limiting transfers to > > around 400 Mbps on a gigabit LAN. With the none cipher, the network becomes > > the bottleneck limiting transfers to around 920 Mbps on the same gigabit > > LAN. > > > > This is between two 8-core AMD Opteron 6200 systems using igb(4) NICs. > > Are you running on HEAD or possibly 10.x (I believe we have OpenSSL > 1.0.x on 10.x)?
Nope, 9.2. And I don't think the 6200 series Opterons have AES-NI. _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"