Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Nov 2015 23:08:16 +0800
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>
To:        =?UTF-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=c3=b8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
Cc:        freebsd-security@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: OpenSSH HPN
Message-ID:  <564359E0.40302@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <86twos7ns9.fsf@desk.des.no>
References:  <86io5a9ome.fsf@desk.des.no> <564309D8.7020307@freebsd.org> <86twos7ns9.fsf@desk.des.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/11/15 7:56 PM, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> writes:
>> The inclusion of the HPN patches meant that we could drop a custom
>> unsupported HPN enabled ssh from our build process.  It makes ssh
>> actually usable.
> Define "usable".  Does it actually make a measurable difference with the
> latest OpenSSH?  And if HPN is so important to you, is there a reason
> why you can't use the port?
useable..  able to use more than 5% of the available bandwidth.

Our environment is not freeBSD exactly. many ports won't compile and 
we don't have ports in our setup (I didn't do it.. don't blame me)
But we do and can compile FreeBSD sourcers so ssh from src is an easy 
recompile or just a binary drop in.
We used to do it by hand from sources ftp'd from OpenBSD and compiled 
straight (no ports),
but since it came to have HPN all that went away because the in-tree 
one worked for us.
Now we'll have to resurrect all that framework and pain.

have you mentioned this plan to Brooks?  Didn't he add it?

>
> DES




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?564359E0.40302>