similar to: Problems with proxy connections

http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/ Mike Stevens and I just released a new set of high performance networking patches for OpenSSH 3.9p1, 4.0p1, and 4.1p1. These patches will provide the same set of functionality across all 3 revisions. New functionality includes 1) HPN performance even without both sides of the connection being HPN enabled. As long as the bulk data flow is in the

Howdy, As a note, we now have HPN patch for OpenSSH 4.2 at http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/ Its still part of the last set of patches (HPN11) so there aren't any additional changes in the code. It patches, configures, compiles, and passes make tests without a problem. I've not done extensive testing for this version of openssh but I don't foresee any problems. I

The HPN12 patch available from http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh addresses performance issues with bulk data transfer over high bandwidth delay paths. By adjusting internal flow control buffers to better fit the outstanding data capacity of the path significant improvements in bulk data throughput performance are achieved. In other words, transfers over the internet are a lot

Hi, http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/ Clearly, the HPN patches significantly boost throughput performance. This enhancement is entirely from tuning the SSH buffer sizes. Alex Tavcar

The results, for anyone interested, can be found here http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/results.html Long story short, there doesn't seem to be any notable difference between the two anymore. I still have a few more test combinations to run (<.5ms rtts and against cygwin) so the conclusions might change but, at this point, I'm no longer seeing any sort of performance

Hello, I know that this has been asked before, just wanted to mention that I, too, would like to see the HPN SSH functionality incorporated in the standard OpenSSH. Would there be technical disadvantages integrating the changes? I know we are all pretty busy, but I would certainly spend time to help, e.g. with testing, documentation, etc. Cheers --pwo -- Peter W. Osel - http://pwo.de/ - pwo

We've released a new HPN (High Performance Network) patch for OpenSSH 3.9p1. We've made two major changes - first off we backed out of all the modifications we made to buffer.c. Turns out that it just wasn't necessary once we fixed a nagging bug in channels.c. I also made a minor change to the buffer sizes in the source and sink functions in scp.c Increasing the size of both

Hello, I know this has come up before; but is the HPN patch (or elements thereof) currently being considered for integration in to the OpenSSH code base? Are there pending issues (buffer management, none cipher, etc) which still need to be addressed? We have been using HPN-SSH for over a year now, and like others, have observed significant performance improvement over standard OpenSSH. I can

I have a customer who is complaining about slow SFTP transfers over a long haul connection. The current transfer rate is limited by the TCP window size and the RTT. I looked at HPN-SSH, but that won't work because we don't control what software the peer is using. I was thinking about coding a much more modest enhancement that just does SO_RCVBUF for specific subsystems. In the interest

Hello I have ported OpenSSH 3.8p1 to a LynxOS platform. Recently I heard a report from the field that v2 is perceived to be significantly slower than v1. Is this a known issue? Are there any configuration parameters that can be modified to make v2 faster? Thanks in advance for your response Amba

We see absolutely dismal performance from Canberra to Perth via Aarnet or Grangenet (gig connections across the country). With standard rsync on a tuned tcp stack, we see about 700k/s. I started playing with the --sockopts and have increased the performance to 1.4M/s which is better, but still way off the pace. There are similar patches for ssh at

We have developed a patch that enables changing the SSH window size using the tcp window size as the source. This allows SSH to obtain maximum use of the bandwidth on high BDP links. We also have a page that describes the changes and performance. http://www.psc.edu/~rapier/hpn-ssh/ The patch against CVS is included here. Common subdirectories: src/usr.bin/ssh/CVS and ssh/CVS diff -u

https://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/hpn-v-ssh-tput.jpg "SCP and the underlying SSH2 protocol implementation in OpenSSH is network performance limited by statically defined internal flow control buffers. These buffers often end up acting as a bottleneck for network throughput of SCP, especially on long and high bandwith network links. Modifying the ssh code to allow the buffers

Hi, I tried different encryptions like arc four, but always with the same result. BTW: googling shows some similar questions and they are stuck on set same speed +-. But non of that solutions helped me. /G?tz > Am 11.08.2015 um 12:14 schrieb Eero Volotinen <eero.volotinen at iki.fi>: > > Usually problem in encryption. > > try cipher arcfour or apply hpn patches to

I have a client host that I don't have access to now, which attempts to establish ssh connection back to my BSD server using the private key. Client runs this command: /usr/bin/ssh -i ~/.ssh/my_key_rsa -o "ExitOnForwardFailure yes" -p $HPORT $HUSER@$HOST -R $LPORT:localhost:$LPORT -N On the server debug log looks like this: Connection from NNN.NNN.NNN.NNN port 43567 debug1: HPN

Hello Are there plans to merge the hpn-ssh (http://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/) and the LPK (http://code.google.com/p/openssh-lpk/) into the mainline openssh. Adding lpk has been logged as a bug in bugzilla as They are two patches that I always apply as the performance boost from hpn-ssh is substantial to say the least, and centralisation of the authorized_keys into a LDAP server

Dear rsync devs, I recently concluded a bug hunt to trace why my rsync-ing to an SBC was much slower than the corresponding iperf3-reported speeds. To give a concise summary of the situation, in slow wifi links using SSH with ProxyCommand tremendously speeds up things: $ dd if=/dev/urandom bs=1M count=50 of=sample.data 50+0 records in 50+0 records out 52428800 bytes (52 MB, 50

If anyone is using the HPN patch on a high performance link I was wondering if you could take a moment to answer a quick question Are you seeing vastly different performance between scp throughput and sftp throughput? On my test network (pittsburgh to chicago) I'm getting 26MB/s with scp (arcfour) and only 6.4MB/s with sftp (arcfour). We just started looking into this but it woudl be nice

Hello list, right now SSH Tunnel / scp is reaches just around 76Mb/s on my E5 Xeon using AES-NI but openssl reaches around 600-700Mb/s using 128aes-cbc cipher. As far as i understand http://www.psc.edu/index.php/hpn-ssh this is due to very small buffers in ssh / scp. Is there any work on this? Like autotuning the buffer size? Are there plans to integrate the hpn patches? Greets, Stefan

I hope this is the right list, as I'm desiring a feature addition in openssh. I would like the option to have a 'null' cipher (after the initial authorization, similar to 'delayed' for compression). It would have to be enabled on both client and server and server would never use it unless it was both enabled and asked for by the client. I'd strongly prefer it be able to