OpenSSH could be faster...then why don't they path it??

[Steven Susbauer]

On 2/6/11 6:20 AM, kellyremo wrote:
>
> https://www.psc.edu/networking/projects/hpn-ssh/hpn-v-ssh-tput.jpg
>
> "SCP and the underlying SSH2 protocol implementation in OpenSSH is
> network performance limited by statically defined internal flow control
> buffers. These buffers often end up acting as a bottleneck for network
> throughput of SCP, especially on long and high bandwith network links.
> Modifying the ssh code to allow the buffers to be defined at run time
> eliminates this bottleneck. We have created a patch that will remove the
> bottlenecks in OpenSSH and is fully interoperable with other servers and
> clients. In addition HPN clients will be able to download faster from
> non HPN servers, and HPN servers will be able to receive uploads faster
> from non HPN clients. However, the host receiving the data must have a
> properly tuned TCP/IP stack."
>
> My question is: So Why Does the original OpenSSH has "limited statically
> defined internal flow control buffers"?? It could be way faster, even 10x!!
>
> With the HPN-SCP path it could be the descendant of FTP! Why aren't
> there any ""OpenSCP packages""? ('normal SCP+HPN-SCP path+no local user
> needed for SCP'ing+chroot by default')
>
> Any opinions?
>
> Thank you!
>

Not needed. Your link is to a page from 2005. OpenSSH is on version 5.8, 
those patches stopped at 5.6 and for very good reason.

See: http://marc.info/?l=openssh-unix-dev&m=123483715829020&w=2