Re: SLOW SSL on dialup

From: Alun Jones (alun@texis.com)
Date: 09/30/02 

From: alun@texis.com (Alun Jones)
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 16:56:16 GMT

In article <eSshLk4ZCHA.1700@tkmsftngp12>, "Egbert Nierop \(MVP for IIS\)"
<egbert_nierop@nospam.com> wrote:
>Fernando Robles wrote:
>> Should it make such a difference though on a dial-up connection? As I
>> stated before, performance is fine on a broadband connection.
>Sure, 80KB will not be transferred using 80KB HTTP.
>Measure it. Be a Dial Up client and watch the bytes received in your Dial-UP
>ICON...

Actually, SSL doesn't tend to add a huge overhead on the amount of data
transmitted, although it does depend on how much the encrypting application
chooses to send in each encrypted record. 8k is the usual size, I'm told.
Wrap that in a header of just a few bytes, repeat until you've transmitted all
the data, and then add the handshake at the beginning and the closure
confirmation at the end, and you've got only a little extra data traffic. The
encrypted data itself generally occupies the same amount of space as the
cleartext data.

Alun.
~~~~

[Please don't email posters, if a Usenet response is appropriate.] 

-- 
Texas Imperial Software   | Try WFTPD, the Windows FTP Server. Find us at
1602 Harvest Moon Place   | http://www.wftpd.com or email alun@texis.com
Cedar Park TX 78613-1419  | VISA/MC accepted.  NT-based sites, be sure to
Fax/Voice +1(512)258-9858 | read details of WFTPD Pro for XP/2000/NT.