Google's argument was that they were able to make use of SSL with low impact due to a patch they made to openSSL. I don't see how that has any consequence to anyone outside of Google unless the patch was committed back upstream and available to all. Besides the fact that the server can not even stay up a few hours running Drupla over HTTP let alone adding in cryptography.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Lorin Ricker <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Lorin@rickernet.us">Lorin@rickernet.us</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
I'm no expert on web servers, but I do have non-trivial experience with<br>
scaling systems -- and esp. in light of the Google pro-SSL argument<br>
below, in light of comparing CLUE's website (a few dozen pages so far,<br>
tops? Perhaps a few 10's of regular users, a few dozen hits/daily?) to<br>
that of the various Google services (orders of magnitude larger in<br>
nearly every dimension), I'd say that taking the "Just Make All Drupal<br>
Pages SSL" is a no-brainer... unless of course CLUE website is on an<br>
ancient 286 with a megabyte of RAM backed by floppy disks! ;-)<br>
<br>
Just my 2¢ worth, respectfully...<br>
best regards,<br>
-- Lorin<br>
<div class="im"><br>
On 05/21/2011 03:41 PM, Will wrote:<br>
> So, um did Google submit this OpenSSL patch back up stream? I believe<br>
> OpenSSL uses a BSD license.<br>
><br>
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:40 PM, David L. Anselmi <<a href="mailto:anselmi@anselmi.us">anselmi@anselmi.us</a><br>
</div><div class="im">> <mailto:<a href="mailto:anselmi@anselmi.us">anselmi@anselmi.us</a>>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Yaverot wrote:<br>
> > Since his argument is mostly economic (taxing servers), I need to<br>
> point out the counter argument:<br>
> > <a href="http://techie-buzz.com/tech-news/google-switch-ssl-cost.html" target="_blank">http://techie-buzz.com/tech-news/google-switch-ssl-cost.html</a><br>
><br>
> "OpenSSL tends to allocate about 50KB of memory for each connection.<br>
> We have patched OpenSSL to<br>
> reduce this to about 5KB."<br>
><br>
> "SSL has been optimized at its best at Google."<br>
><br>
> "These facts prove that SSL is not as resource intensive as it is<br>
> blamed to be."<br>
><br>
> I'm sold! Sign us up!<br>
><br>
> Dave<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> clue mailing list<br>
</div>> <a href="mailto:clue@cluedenver.org">clue@cluedenver.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:clue@cluedenver.org">clue@cluedenver.org</a>><br>
<div class="im">> <a href="http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue" target="_blank">http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
</div>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> clue mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:clue@cluedenver.org">clue@cluedenver.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue" target="_blank">http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
clue mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:clue@cluedenver.org">clue@cluedenver.org</a><br>
<a href="http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue" target="_blank">http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>