Re: Speed Difference SCP vs. RCP
From: Michael (michaeln_at_twentyten.org)
Date: 01/25/05
- Next message: Pierre Asselin: "Re: Windows XP and OpenSSH problem..."
- Previous message: Dan Stromberg: "Re: What's the deal on the -X vs -Y thing?"
- In reply to: Matthew Poole: "Re: Speed Difference SCP vs. RCP"
- Next in thread: Darren Tucker: "Re: Speed Difference SCP vs. RCP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 17:25:59 -0800
"Matthew Poole" <spam@stops.here> wrote in message
news:ct43nt$u5o$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
[snip]
> They seem about right. Remember that SCP has the encryption overhead.
> It's slower than straight copying as a result.
Of course. I was making sure the ratios seemed right.
> Check the documentation, there may be a faster cypher available to you.
> I can't remember what the default is, but TwoFish and Blowfish are meant
> to be pretty quick.
What about plain text rcp/rsh? Given that this is a local LAN would this
group still not recommend using it?
Michael
- Next message: Pierre Asselin: "Re: Windows XP and OpenSSH problem..."
- Previous message: Dan Stromberg: "Re: What's the deal on the -X vs -Y thing?"
- In reply to: Matthew Poole: "Re: Speed Difference SCP vs. RCP"
- Next in thread: Darren Tucker: "Re: Speed Difference SCP vs. RCP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
