Re: was TightVNC compression vs. SSH compression, now protocol overheads

2001-11-09 Thread John Roland Elliott
In response to "Frank Evan Perdicaro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, who says, > >Recall that for a dial-up connection, you are typically running IP on > >the raw layer, TCP on that, PPP on that, then perhaps a VPN on that, > >perhaps with SSL on that, then VNC on top, and finally the user is doing > >some

Re: was TightVNC compression vs. SSH compression, now protocol overheads

2001-11-09 Thread Tim Waugh
On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 02:04:16AM +, Jonathan Morton wrote: > ... does not run on UDP. I don't think NFS does either. Yes it does. > You forget that UDP stands for Unreliable Datagram Protocol, No it doesn't. > If you look closely at the RFB specification, you will notice that > there i

Re: was TightVNC compression vs. SSH compression, now protocol overheads

2001-11-08 Thread Jonathan Morton
> > Is the slowdown that results from SSH caused by 1) an increase in >the amount >> of data sent between the two endpoints of the secure tunnel or is the >> slowdown caused by 2) just the additional computation necessary to encrypt >> and decrypt the data stream? > >Rather than ask the questi

was TightVNC compression vs. SSH compression, now protocol overheads

2001-11-08 Thread Frank Evan Perdicaro
> Is the slowdown that results from SSH caused by 1) an increase in the amount > of data sent between the two endpoints of the secure tunnel or is the > slowdown caused by 2) just the additional computation necessary to encrypt > and decrypt the data stream? Rather than ask the question like that