Let's be clear about this. Back in 1995 when we were using sun4m and
P90s with 16mb of RAM, SSL was a problem. More than 100 SSL users and
the machine would suffer a bit.
Do you have 10-year old machines? Do you have more than 100
concurrent users? (at the same time?)
If both of these aren't true, you won't have any problems with SSL
trust me ;-) My personal colo box is a bit outdated -- it's 1.67g
with 1gig of RAM, and it is currently handling 200-250 concurrent SSL
sessions without breaking 2% CPU.
On Jan 23, 2009, at 7:05 AM, Eliezer E Chávez wrote:
CPU Time, with ssl i'm going to expend so much machine resources...
Regards,
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:32 AM, <jmose...@corp.xanadoo.com> wrote:
The easiest thing for you to do is have the entire site in SSL. Is
there a
particular reason you only want the login credentials passed using
secure
sockets layer?
James Moseley
--
Eliezer E Chávez
+58-416-6125676
eliezer.cha...@gmail.com
>>http://www.bumeran.com.ve/cv/eliezer-chavez
_______________________________________________
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
--
Jo Rhett
Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source
and other randomness
_______________________________________________
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
