On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:59:30PM -0800, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > Ben Woods wrote this message on Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 15:40 +0800: > > On Wednesday, 11 November 2015, Bryan Drewery <bdrew...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > > On 11/10/15 9:52 AM, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > > > > My vote is to remove the HPN patches. First, the NONE cipher made more > > > > sense back when we didn't have AES-NI widely available, and you were > > > > seriously limited by it's performance. Now we have both aes-gcm and > > > > chacha-poly which it's performance should be more than acceptable for > > > > today's uses (i.e. cipher performance is 2GB/sec+). > > > > > > AES-NI doesn't help the absurdity of double-encrypting when using scp or > > > rsync/ssh over an encrypted VPN, which is where NONE makes sense to use > > > for me. > > > > I have to agree that there are cases when the NONE cipher makes sense, and > > it is up to the end user to make sure they know what they are doing. > > > > Personally I have used it at home to backup my old FreeBSD server (which > > does not have AESNI) over a dedicated network connection to a backup server > > using rsync/ssh. Since it was not possible for anyone else to be on that > > local network, and the server was so old it didn't have AESNI and would > > soon be retired, using the NONE cipher sped up the transfer significantly. > > If you have a trusted network, why not just use nc?
I think you kidding: - scp need only one command on initiator side and no additional setup on target. simple, well know. - nc need additional work on target, need synchronization for file names with target, also need ssh to target for start, etc... Too complex. _______________________________________________ email@example.com mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"