Re: [HACKERS] Speed of SSL connections; cost of renegotiation
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Speed of SSL connections; cost of renegotiation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8486.1050028983@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Speed of SSL connections; cost of renegotiation (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Speed of SSL connections; cost of renegotiation
|
Список | pgsql-interfaces |
Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org> writes: >> So, questions for the group: where did the decision to renegotiate >> every 64K come from? Do we need it at all? Do we need it at such a >> short interval? And if we do need it, shouldn't the logic be >> symmetric, so that renegotiations are forced during large input >> transfers as well as large output transfers? > It doesn't look like there's any guidance from mod_ssl in Apache 2.0. Yeah, I looked at mod_ssl before sending in my gripe. AFAICT Apache *never* forces a renegotiation based on amount of data sent --- all that code is intended just to handle transitions between different webpages with different security settings. So is that a precedent we can follow; or is it an optimization based on the assumption that not a lot of data will be transferred on any one web page? (But even if you assume the latter, there are plenty of web pages with more than 64K of data. It's hard to believe mod_ssl would be built like that if security demands a renegotiation every 64K or so.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-interfaces по дате отправления: