Ben Lindstrom wrote:
> The only performance testing I've ever seen was a "max transfer rate"
> test.

This is the tests we most commonly use when developing HPN-SSH. We're
actually in the process of developing some methods to test application
layer latency though.

> Which lead to deciding the encryption order and discussions about
> v2 vs v1 preformance differences. Along with Internet2 testing to find a
> better way of gaining preformance on massive pipes.
> In both cases I believe the test was pretty much a "dd if=/dev/urandom ..
> | ssh '| cat /dev/null'" style testing or transferring of real data.
> Timing the time it takes to move XX amount of data then doing the math.

I also use Iperf over a SSH tunnel to do tests. It can give you some
useful options (mutliple streams, different RWINs, MSS, and multiple
streasm, disable nagle, etc) and statistics (1sec avgs, etc).
Unfortunately, it uncovered an odd situation with the HPN-SSH code
though that I'm still trying to resolve (the window doesn't grow. :\).

> I don't believe anyone has done any testing on the cost of
> authentication. Truth of the matter is if it is near instance I doubt
> anyone really cares (I sure never have =).

I care! Not a whole lot because we generally see the authentication
process as sunk cost. It matters a lot on low bandwidth long delay
connections involving small transfers. Its more difficult to amortize
the cost of authentication in those instances.

> But if you want to test authentication cost a simple "time ssh site
> /bin/true" I'm sure would be close enough.. This isn't a realtime event
> so what is a few microseconds between friends. =) However, to get true
> stats you may want to disable hashing and encryption.

In this situation one could also use tcpdumps and look at the packet timing.
openssh-unix-dev mailing list