(waking up from post-holiday coma :-)) ... Happy 2014!
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Alex wrote:
> > This would require a bit more work than the current patch, but I'd love
> to see a similar strategy in nginx. Hardcoding a fixed record size will
> inevitably lead to suboptimal delivery of e
Hello!
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:58:43AM -0800, Ilya Grigorik wrote:
> Awesome, really glad to see this! A couple of followup questions...
>
> (a) Is there any way to force a packet flush on record end? At the moment
> nginx will fragment multiple records across packet boundaries, which is
> su
On 2013-12-20 13:19, Maxim Dounin wrote:
> description:
> SSL: ssl_buffer_size directive.
Great to see this going into mainline.
On 2013-12-20 19:58, Ilya Grigorik wrote:
> (a) Is there any way to force a packet flush on record end?
That would be indeed nice. Flushing would prevent a TLS reco
Awesome, really glad to see this! A couple of followup questions...
(a) Is there any way to force a packet flush on record end? At the moment
nginx will fragment multiple records across packet boundaries, which is
suboptimal as it means that I need a minimum of two packets to decode any
record - e
details: http://hg.nginx.org/nginx/rev/a297b7ad6f94
branches:
changeset: 5487:a297b7ad6f94
user: Maxim Dounin
date: Fri Dec 20 16:18:25 2013 +0400
description:
SSL: ssl_buffer_size directive.
diffstat:
src/event/ngx_event_openssl.c | 9 ++---
src/event/ngx_event_ope
