"TM" == Tom Mornini [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
TM 2) Better scalability. I've head (but never benchmarked) that SSL in
TMgeneral is 100 times more processor intensive than non-ssl connections.
TMI want my mod_perl server running mod_perl, not mod_ssl! In a
TMhigh-volume site you're
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Vivek Khera wrote:
"TM" == Tom Mornini [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
TM 2) Better scalability. I've head (but never benchmarked) that SSL in
TMgeneral is 100 times more processor intensive than non-ssl connections.
TMI want my mod_perl server running mod_perl, not
"TM" == Tom Mornini [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you have a high volume site that uses SSL, you should really be
offloading the SSL processing to dedicated cryptography hardware.
TM A fairly new option, I believe, and an excellent point.
Not really. I saw these boards available at least 2
On 3. februar 2000 19:49 Tom Mornini wrote:
2) Better scalability. I've head (but never benchmarked) that SSL in
general is 100 times more processor intensive than non-ssl
connections.
That would have to be if you didn't cache session keys and had to
set up a new symmetric key for every
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Vivek Khera wrote:
"TM" == Tom Mornini [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you have a high volume site that uses SSL, you should really be
offloading the SSL processing to dedicated cryptography hardware.
TM A fairly new option, I believe, and an excellent point.
Not
