![]() ![]() Its authors recommend the use of more modern protocols like sftp and rsync for file transfer instead The scp protocol is outdated, inflexible and not readily fixed. Since this question is not that old and no one else referred to this solution I think it is appropriate since it pushes the bandwidth to the max limit (10MiB/s in my case) unlike scp that is at arount 250kb/s so that answers your question.Īctually the same 250kb/s with rsync - at least with the port specifier rclone -Avvp cap_* -e "ssh -p 1087 -i id_rsa" a post to the openssh-unix-dev mailing list: Also ran an iperf test over TCP and noticed 2Mbits/sec with FP, and 55Mbits/sec without. To remove scp from the equation, I ran a Windows file copy operation across the VPN and noticed similar performance to scp with and without FP enabled. So it seems my issue is likely a NAT Traversal situation where the scp TCP data is ultimately encrypted and encapsulated in ESP & UDP packets, and consequently subject to FP. In reviewing the firewall log, flood detection was occurring on both source & dest ports 4500 over the public IP addresses, not the private site-to-site internal VPN addresses. ![]() What does SSH use UDP for? - It doesn't directly from what I read. Sender: cygwin, Receiver: Fedora 20, Firewall Sophos UTM. When turning FP back on, the rate dropped back to ~250KB/s. After disabling UDP flood protection (FP) on the destination firewall, the transfer rate increased to 6.5MB/s. Just had this issue doing a site-to-site transfer of a large mp4 file via scp. The strange thing is that the transfer rate is about 413KB/s and the file size is about 413KB so really it should transfer one file per second, however it's taking about 4.3 seconds per file.Īny idea where this overhead comes from, and is there any way to make it faster? ![]() I'm trying to copy a batch of files with scp but it is very slow. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |