X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 10:32:10 -0500 (EST)
From: Igor Peshansky <pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: very poor cygwin scp performance in some situations
In-Reply-To: <20060328151209.GO20907@calimero.vinschen.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.63.0603281027550.18642@access1.cims.nyu.edu>
References: <04b601c651b4$a1e9e020$b3db87d4 AT multiplay DOT co DOT uk>  <20060328074041 DOT GJ20907 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <01f501c65254$796572e0$b3db87d4 AT multiplay DOT co DOT uk>  <20060328143952 DOT GN20907 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 63 DOT 0603280951550 DOT 18642 AT access1 DOT cims DOT nyu DOT edu>  <20060328151209 DOT GO20907 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Corinna Vinschen wrote:

> On Mar 28 09:57, Igor Peshansky wrote:
> > All of the above will probably need to be suggested to the OpenSSH team
> > (preferably in the form of patches).  Volunteers welcome (nudge-nudge,
> > wink-wink, Steve). :-)
>
> You don't seriously believe that stuff like that hasn't been already
> suggested a couple of times, do you?  Read again what I said about
> the developers stance on security vs. performance and what I said about
> the HSN patch.

I did read it.  The HSN patch is *much* more drastic than what I was
proposing.  Maybe I'm dense, but I don't see any impact on security from
changing the buffer size (as long as buffer overflows are properly
addressed).  After all, that buffer is used to store *encrypted* data,
right?

Well, one way to find out is to post an actual patch to the openssh list
and get flamed... :-)  Perhaps one of these days I'll get a round tuit.
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_	    pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu | igor AT watson DOT ibm DOT com
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu t'en rends compte."
"But no -- you are no fool; you call yourself a fool, there's proof enough in
that!" -- Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac"

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/