[NTLUG:Discuss] File transfer speeds

[Courtney Grimland]

Pinging from 192.168.0.4 (Linux box) to 192.168.0.2 (Win98 box) I get:

bash-2.05a# ping 192.168.0.2
PING 192.168.0.2 (192.168.0.2): 56 octets data
64 octets from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=128 time=0.4 ms
64 octets from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=128 time=0.3 ms
64 octets from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=128 time=0.3 ms
64 octets from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=3 ttl=128 time=0.3 ms
64 octets from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=4 ttl=128 time=0.3 ms
64 octets from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=5 ttl=128 time=0.2 ms
64 octets from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=6 ttl=128 time=0.3 ms
64 octets from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=7 ttl=128 time=0.3 ms
64 octets from 192.168.0.2: icmp_seq=8 ttl=128 time=0.3 ms

--- 192.168.0.2 ping statistics ---
9 packets transmitted, 9 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 0.2/0.3/0.4 ms
bash-2.05a# 


I guess there's just a lot of overhead involved in the
encryption/decryption process.  A lot more than I would have thought.

What FTP servers are out there, and what would be an appropriate one for
me to set up on the Linux box?


On Sat, 6 Jul 2002 11:12:50 -0400
rob apodaca <robert.apodaca at attbi.com> wrote:

> ...
> > The revealing thing is that the
> > file transfer was via WinSCP to the sshd daemon on the Linux box.  I
> > realize there is overhead for the encryption/decryption, but still,
> > the 500Kb/s seemed rather poor.  
> 
> I have recently started trying to use ssh for file transfer. One
> machine running open sshd, the other running sftp (part of the open
> ssh client package). I experience VERY slow transfers indeed...much as
> you describe, however standard ftp transfer rates are very good. If
> you perform a google search such as:
> 
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=sftp+slow+transfer
> 
> you will see that there seems to be a problem with ssh file transfers.
> 
> I've just started invesigating my problem so I dont have too much more
> info to provide...perhaps someone else on the list might have some??
> 
> So, I am thinking you may not have a hardware/wiring problem, but
> rather a protocol problem. Perhaps try a different method of measuring
> transfer rates...I saw some good suggestions in this thread. Just out
> of curiosity, what kind of response time does ping reveal?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


-- 
Nigel: These go to eleven.
Marty: Is it any louder?
Nigel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten.