On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Freddie Cash <fjwc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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. > Correction, the AMD Opteron 6200-series of CPUs to support AES-NI. However, these storage boxes use AMD Opteron 6128 CPUs. :( They do not support AES-NI. AES-based ciphers are extremely slow on these systems; the multithreaded AES-based ciphers are better, but nowhere near what the NONE cipher provides. :) sysutils/bbcp is interesting as an alternative, but it's a lot more complex than just enabling NONE in OpenSSH. -- Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ 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"