Re: Ssh.. can we please have HPN back?

On 2017-05-18 22:28, Julian Elischer wrote:
> So after stripping out the HPN version of ssh from our product becasue
> "it was no longer needed" we dicovered that we were premature in doing so.
> Apparently ssh still really needs HPN to get any throughput at all when
> there are latencies involved.
> 
> 
> For example, with HPN we get 13MB/sec between the Azure US west
> Data center and the Azure East data center.But the standard ssh in 10.3
> (with HPN stripped out) can barely manage 2MB/sec transfers.
> 
> I did ask at the time whether it was proved that the new ssh didn't
> require the HPN changes,
> and was assured, "no" but it would appear that the picture isn't as clear.
> tht seems silly to have to import the port when we have what would
> otherwise be a
> perfectly good ssh as part of hte system, and it's really annoying
> having to specify
> /usr/local/bin/scp  or /usr/local/bin/ssh in every script.
> 
> So can we please have the latest version of the HPN changes back in the
> default system please?
> It seem rather odd that the upstream openssh has had this problem for SO
> LONG and not fixed it.
> 
> Julian
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"

I have this stand-alone patch ready now:

https://github.com/openssh/openssh-portable/compare/master...allanjude:V_7_5_dynamic_window

In my benchmarks with 100ms of latency (from dummynet) is increases SSH
send throughput from 1 megabyte/sec to 225 megabytes/sec provided a
large enough socket buffer.

Still seeing lesser performance on the recv case, working on it.

-- 
Allan Jude