On 04/17/2015 09:46 AM, Mike Hoye wrote:
On 2015-04-17 12:20 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 6:13 PM, <andrewneme...@gmail.com> wrote:
As a non-tech person, the only thing I know is https means my browser
runs even slower on DSL.
This has already been addressed earlier in the thread. HTTPS has
negligible performance impact. See e.g.:
https://istlsfastyet.com/
I don't see where that document speaks to the impact of TLS on caching
proxies, which I'm guessing is the source of the performance hit Andrew
mentions.
It's been a while since I've looked, but in Canada (and probably other
geographically large countries) the telcos/ISP with large exurban/rural
client bases used to use caching proxies a lot.
From my past experience with satellite based connections https was
appreciably slower than http. I don't know how much of the affect was
due to the loss of the caching proxy or how much was due to the
latency+handshake issue. This was also several years ago and I don't
have experience with the improved networking in Firefox over satellite .
In third world countries, such as the United States, many people in
rural areas are limited to satellite base connections and may be
adversely affected by the move to encrypted connections. This isn't to
say we shouldn't move to encryption, just that the network experience in
major metropolitan areas isn't indicative of what someone in rural
Virginia might experience for example.
/bc
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
