W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 2000

Re: draft-ietf-tls-http-upgrade reissued

From: John Stracke <francis@ecal.com>
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 17:39:49 -0400
Message-ID: <3911EE25.10C32D04@ecal.com>
To: IETF HTTP List <http-wg@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Julien Pierre wrote:

> You may not be aware of that fact, but in a typical secure web server today, the
> overhead of doing encryption represents about 90% of CPU cycles spent. This means
> a web server is an order of magnitude slower if it has to server secure
> connections vs non-secure.
>
> In turn, your proposal would result in an average tenfold increase in the
> hardware requirement for servers, as well as waste of energy to power all those
> CPUs, all for no good reason at all. Or the alternative would be a tenfold
> increase in average web server latency, given no hardware upgrade.

Just because a client always asks to upgrade doesn't mean the server has to obey.

--
/==============================================================\
|John Stracke    | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.|
|Chief Scientist |=============================================|
|eCal Corp.      |"HTTP is what happens in the absence of good |
|francis@ecal.com|design." -- Keith Moore                      |
\==============================================================/
Received on Thursday, 4 May 2000 22:40:41 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:33:37 EDT