On 8/07/2013 10:49 PM, Kirk Wolf wrote:
Anyone who is still using the crappy ssh-rand-helper instead of ICSF
/dev/random should look into HCR77A0, which is MUCH better.
ssh-rand-helper is terrible - slow and expensive and not as secure.
Thanks for the tip!
Kirk Wolf
Dovetailed Technologies
http://dovetail.com
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:16 AM, David Crayford <dcrayf...@gmail.com> wrote:
IIRC, IBM have a new release of SSH that has CPACF acceleration.
On 8/07/2013 9:57 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Comparing performance of ssh to MVS and Solaris severs, respectively:
From Solaris to MVS:
133$ time ssh user@MVS date
Mon Jul 8 07:43:06 MDT 2013
real 0m15.10s
user 0m0.07s
sys 0m0.01s
From Solaris to another Solaris:
134$ time ssh user@solaris date
Monday, July 8, 2013 07:43:57 AM MDT
real 0m0.61s
user 0m0.15s
sys 0m0.01s
The MVS performance is awful (in the synchronic sense).
Is there any way to tell where the overhead lies, or
even whether ICSF is being used rather than ssh_rand_helper?
How does this compare with other users' experience?
(Once an interactive connection is established, response
is quite good.)
-- gil
------------------------------**------------------------------**
----------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
------------------------------**------------------------------**----------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
