<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16.08.2016 14:17, Jason A. Donenfeld
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAHmME9ooEnf4ZsyciTQShzN2S6+0btpnW61FBTQzfJHZjCVLcw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: jens <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jens@viisauksena.de"><jens@viisauksena.de></a>
thx, thats true ... we were mostly interested in comparing speed in
similar setups that we would deploy.
But you ' re right - reducing workload from 20 to 12 in cypher make
them not directly comparable
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Alternatively, you could pretty easily tweak wireguard to use
chacha20/12 by changing "for (i = 0; i < 20; i += 2) {" to "for (i =
0; i < 12; i += 2) {" in src/crypto/chacha20poly1305.c.
Would be interested in fair side-by-side benchmarks of the two.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>here some more tests with fastd directly, i dont see any big
difference between salsa20 and salsa2012, but i big difference in
direction ... which is somehow new for me.</p>
<p>i will not do the different wireguard testings with different
ciphers, as i am still struggling in building valid reproducable
kmod..ipk packages for LEDE</p>
<p>so i think fastd testing is finished by this (which at all only
was to compare to our existing setup) - a small notice : OpenWRT
Wiki was wrong with CPU speed of TPlink841v11 - it is not 560MHz,
it is 650Mhz - if somebody ever want to compare another embedded
device<br>
</p>
<p>greetz Jens<br>
<br>
</p>
<p>2016-08-16 06:36:42 +0000 --- Verbose: new session with
<foo> established using method `salsa20+umac'.<br>
</p>
<p>TCP <br>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br>
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr<br>
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 18.3 MBytes 15.3 Mbits/sec
0 sender<br>
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 16.6 MBytes 14.0
Mbits/sec receiver<br>
TCP - other direction<br>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br>
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr<br>
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 13.6 MBytes 11.4 Mbits/sec
28 sender<br>
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 13.5 MBytes 11.3
Mbits/sec receiver<br>
</p>
<p>UDP (pushed 200M udp - somthing up to 30 is fine with many jitter
and loss)<br>
[ 5] local 192.168.2.23 port 5201 connected to 192.168.1.23 port
44727<br>
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Jitter
Lost/Total Datagrams<br>
[ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 1.15 MBytes 9.63 Mbits/sec 5.144 ms
0/147 (0%) <br>
[ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec 5.144 ms 0/0
(-nan%) <br>
[ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 0.00 Bytes 0.00 bits/sec 5.144 ms 0/0
(-nan%) <br>
... killed/crashed<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
again<br>
2016-08-16 07:22:41 +0000 --- Verbose: new session with
<foo> established using method `salsa2012+umac'.<br>
TCP direction -> peer - server<br>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br>
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr<br>
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 18.4 MBytes 15.4 Mbits/sec
12 sender<br>
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 16.7 MBytes 14.0
Mbits/sec receiver<br>
TCP direction -> server - peer<br>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br>
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr<br>
[ 5] 0.00-10.04 sec 13.8 MBytes 11.5 Mbits/sec
25 sender<br>
[ 5] 0.00-10.04 sec 13.7 MBytes 11.4
Mbits/sec receiver<br>
<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
make the world nicer, please use PGP encryption</pre>
</body>
</html>