Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 10:21:02 -0700 From: Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> To: Mark Martinec <Mark.Martinec+freebsd@ijs.si> Cc: FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ssh None cipher Message-ID: <CAOjFWZ4EndnanZ_oyMeA9bH%2BxxTZ%2BJ8mnJtTdvBjTMYvUsXr2w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <544246E8.1090001@ijs.si> References: <CAOc73CCvQqwg65tt9vs54CoU1HGvV7ZxLWeQwXiSOm8UjtV50w@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1410172242240.27826@multics.mit.edu> <5441E834.2000906@freebsd.org> <544246E8.1090001@ijs.si>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Oct 18, 2014 3:54 AM, "Mark Martinec" <Mark.Martinec+freebsd@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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOjFWZ4EndnanZ_oyMeA9bH%2BxxTZ%2BJ8mnJtTdvBjTMYvUsXr2w>