this has been a cause of great pain for a lng time.
http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/
as openssh seems not to be fixing it (and i do not consider a 2mb fixed
buffer to be fixed, especially not from a 100mb link here in tokyo and
servers in the states, europe, and africa), per
Randy Bush wrote:
this has been a cause of great pain for a lng time.
http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/
as openssh seems not to be fixing it (and i do not consider a 2mb fixed
buffer to be fixed, especially not from a 100mb link here in tokyo and
servers in the states, euro
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
> Randy Bush wrote:
>> this has been a cause of great pain for a lng time.
>>
>>http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/
>>
>> as openssh seems not to be fixing it (and i do not consider a 2mb fixed
>> buffer to be fixed
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
> > Randy Bush wrote:
> >> this has been a cause of great pain for a lng time.
> >>
> >>http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/
> >>
> >> as openssh seems not to be fixi
Ian Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Brooks Davis wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
> > > Randy Bush wrote:
> > >> this has been a cause of great pain for a lng time.
> > >>
> > >>http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/
> > >>
> > >
> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:29:45 +0900
> From: Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Ian Smith wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Brooks Davis wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
> > > > Randy Bush wrote:
> > > >> this has been a cau
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brooks
Davis writes:
>On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
>> FYI - HPN is already a build option in the openssh-portable port.
>
>I do think we should strongly consider adding the rest of it to the base.
Am I the only one who would be happ
Brooks Davis wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
Randy Bush wrote:
this has been a cause of great pain for a lng time.
http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/
as openssh seems not to be fixing it (and i do not consider a 2mb fixed
buffer to be f
Garrett Wollman wrote:
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brooks
Davis writes:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
FYI - HPN is already a build option in the openssh-portable port.
I do think we should strongly consider adding the rest of it to the base.
Am I the only
Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Am I the only one who would be happier if openssh were not in the base
> system at all? I always have to install the port anyway; having it in
> the base just gives me more files I need to delete after an install.
Well, it's not going to get any bette
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 01:02:07PM +0200, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> Brooks Davis wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
>>> Randy Bush wrote:
this has been a cause of great pain for a lng time.
http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/
> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:11:13 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brooks
> Davis writes:
>
> >On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 06:30:05PM -0700, Peter Losher wrote:
> >> FYI - HPN is already a build option in the opens
< said:
> Garrett Wollman wrote:
>> Am I the only one who would be happier if openssh were not in the base
>> system at all?
> Quite possibly :)
> I don't think it's at all viable to ship FreeBSD without an ssh client
> in this day and age.
If that were what I had suggested, you might have a p
> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:43:39 -0400
> From: Garrett Wollman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> < said:
>
> > Garrett Wollman wrote:
> >> Am I the only one who would be happier if openssh were not in the base
> >> system at all?
>
> > Quite possibly :)
>
> > I don't think it
Brooks Davis wrote:
It is worth noting that over most people's WAN's the none cipher is
pretty pointless since you can do nearly 200Mbps with arcfour and a decent CPU
(IIRC the graphs are several years old).
In my case I'm CPU bound from other processes, so reducing SSH overhead
will have a n
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:11:13 -0400 (EDT)
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brooks
Am I the only one who would be happier if openssh were not in the base
system at all? I always have to install the port anyway; having it in
the base just gives me more files I need to delete after an install.
(Hei
> From: "Steven Hartland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 03:32:39 +0100
>
> >> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:11:13 -0400 (EDT)
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brooks
> >> Am I the only one who would be happier if openssh were not in the base
> >> system at all? I always have to ins
17 matches
Mail list logo