From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 28 15:00:37 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B99710656D3 for ; Thu, 28 May 2009 15:00:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vince@unsane.co.uk) Received: from unsane.co.uk (unsane-pt.tunnel.tserv5.lon1.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f08:110::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 939988FC18 for ; Thu, 28 May 2009 15:00:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vince@unsane.co.uk) Received: from vhoffman.lon.namesco.net (150.117-84-212.staticip.namesco.net [212.84.117.150]) (authenticated bits=0) by unsane.co.uk (8.14.3/8.14.0) with ESMTP id n4SF0g3R060276 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 28 May 2009 16:00:45 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from vince@unsane.co.uk) Message-ID: <4A1EA70F.7040909@unsane.co.uk> Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 16:00:31 +0100 From: Vincent Hoffman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-GB; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20081204 Thunderbird/3.0b1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kirk Strauser References: <200905281030.n4SAUXdA046386@banyan.cs.ait.ac.th> <200905280847.12966.kirk@strauser.com> <200905280904.44025.kirk@strauser.com> In-Reply-To: <200905280904.44025.kirk@strauser.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Wojciech Puchar , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Remotely edit user disk quota X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 15:00:37 -0000 On 28/5/09 15:04, Kirk Strauser wrote: > On Thursday 28 May 2009 08:53:23 am Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > >> depends, between pentium I and core2 quad. >> >> what's a difference? >> > > Well, I can transfer 25MB/s between hosts on the LAN without my CPU ever > breaking 10% CPU usage. I'm of the opinion that most people don't need to > optimize for CPU in such cases when the security payoffs are so great. > There is also the option of the HPN patches (http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/ included as options in the openssh-portable port) which allows a none cypher so you have the security of the encrypted key authentication but no encryption overhead for transferring files. However the OP doesnt seem to want to transfer files over it so the encryption overhead will be pretty minimal anyway.