trafficserver-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Openssl 1.1.0f Support
Date Thu, 21 Sep 2017 00:38:40 GMT
I meant to say 1.1.0. 

-Bryan

> On Sep 20, 2017, at 3:54 PM, Bryan Call <bcall@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> I was see something like 2x the performance in my benchmarks with OpenSSL 1.0.1.  I have
been doing all my development with OpenSSL 1.0.1 ATS since May, when I upgraded to Fedora
26.
> 
> -Bryan
> 
>> On Sep 20, 2017, at 2:16 PM, Dave Thompson <davet@oath.com <mailto:davet@oath.com>>
wrote:
>> 
>> Sorry Jeremy, my recollections were from 16 months ago which is fuzzy by now at best.
  The gist of my recollection is that QAT is an IO based async engine, which of course ATS
already has done extensively.   I recall the under-the-hood QAT longjumping was a non-starter
in an ATS framework.   This was all static code analysis.  Integration looked like a non-starter,
so no performance test done.
>> 
>> Regarding performance testing of "ATS + Openssl 1.1.0(x) + standard aes-ni acceleration",
Susan (?Bryan?) was just telling me today of a measured order of magnitude improvement over
with the same using Openssl 1.0.1(x) and small packet sizes...  Improvement attributed to
lock contention issues in the older OpenSSL 1.0.1(x).
>>   
>> Dave
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Jeremy Payne <jp557198@gmail.com <mailto:jp557198@gmail.com>>
wrote:
>> Dave,
>> 
>> Did you run any comparison performance tests using the QAT engine ?
>> Specifically around these configurations(or similar)
>> 
>> 1. ATS + Openssl 1.1.0(x) + QAT engine(sync)
>> 2. ATS + Openssl 1.1.0(x) + standard aes-ni acceleration
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Dave Thompson <davet@oath.com <mailto:davet@oath.com>>
wrote:
>> > July 2016, I was evaluating the async Quick Assist in the context of ATS,
>> > and came away with the opinion it's value comes into play with a much
>> > simpler application.   It's effectively it's own async engine, long jumping
>> > across the stack, and doesn't play well or add  value to ATS's more
>> > extensive model to do similar.... not to mention mutually exclusive in their
>> > current forms.
>> >
>> > Dave
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Alan Carroll <solidwallofcode@oath.com
<mailto:solidwallofcode@oath.com>>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Susan and Dave Thompson were working on something related to that, "crypto
>> >> proxy". There's a small mention of it by Susan at the Fall 2016 summit in
>> >> the TLS state slides
>> >> (https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TS/Presentations+-+2016 <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TS/Presentations+-+2016>).
I'd
>> >> start there and see if you can bug Susan or Good Dave*. Although that work
>> >> was designed to use an off box crypto engine, the implementation from the
>> >> ATS point of view is identical to what you're writing about. Susan will
be
>> >> at the Fall 2017 Summit, I'd look her up then as well.
>> >>
>> >> * To distinguish from "Evil Dave" Carlin.
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Jeremy Payne <jp557198@gmail.com <mailto:jp557198@gmail.com>>
wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks guys.. Thats all I needed to know.. Now I can look closer at
my
>> >>> end. Will let you know what I find.
>> >>>
>> >>> Also, any plans on supporting openssl async, which then allows for
>> >>> taking full advantage of the Intel QAT engine?
>> >>> Understood patches/commits are welcome, but just figured there may be
>> >>> some behind the scene works already started.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks!
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Alan Carroll <solidwallofcode@oath.com
<mailto:solidwallofcode@oath.com>>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > Susan has also run some performance tests with 7.1.x and openSSL
1.1
>> >>> > vs.
>> >>> > openSSL 1.0.2.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zwoop@apache.org
<mailto:zwoop@apache.org>>
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Sep 19, 2017, at 2:20 PM, Jeremy Payne <jp557198@gmail.com
<mailto:jp557198@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I can link ATS 7.x and 8.x against openssl 1.1.0f, however,
for some
>> >>> >> reason I can't establish a SSL/TLS connection.  Has anyone
>> >>> >> successfully linked ATS against openssl 1.1.0f  and successfully
been
>> >>> >> able to establish a SSL/TLS session?
>> >>> >> In other words, is openssl 1.1.0f supported by ATS? If not,
what about
>> >>> >> an earlier version of 1.1.0(x)??
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Yeh, we’re running current master with OpenSSL v1.1.0f on
>> >>> >> docs.trafficserver.apache.org <http://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/>.
Maybe you have some mismatch / issues
>> >>> >> between
>> >>> >> headers (when compiling ATS) and runtime?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Cheers,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> — Leif
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> 
> 


Mime
View raw message