Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 19:33:04 +0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> To: =?UTF-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=c3=b8rgrav?= <des@des.no>, Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OpenSSH HPN Message-ID: <56432770.7030600@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <861tby9k9s.fsf@desk.des.no> References: <86io5a9ome.fsf@desk.des.no> <261DDEE0-B792-4715-A8EF-27E491122BD2@gid.co.uk> <861tby9k9s.fsf@desk.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11/10/15 7:16 PM, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk> writes: >> Is removing HPN going to impact the performance of tunnelled X >> connexions? yes if your rtt is greater than about 85 mSec I don't know he details but I noticed a big difference. I had thought X wouldn't show much difference but in fact it did. At work we had to add HPN to get anything like acceptable performance on various tunnels our appliance uses. > I don't think so. It mostly affects the performance of long > unidirectional streams (file transfers) whereas the X protocol, as far > as I know, is a bidirectional exchange of relatively short messages. It > may make a difference for applications that transfer large textures... > I don't really know enough about the X protocol to say for certain, but > I am typing this in Emacs over a non-HPN SSH connection, and I regularly > tunnel Firefox between the same two machines (RHEL 7 desktop at work and > FreeBSD 10 desktop at home). > > DES
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?56432770.7030600>