[stunnel-users] Re: samba over stunnel performance

Mon Jul 25 00:48:36 CEST 2005

Sorry, forgot to include my specs...

laptop:
windows xp, tried with 4.11, 4.10 and 4.09

unix box:
stunnel -version:
stunnel 4.11 on i386-unknown-freebsd5.3 PTHREAD+POLL+IPv4+LIBWRAP with
OpenSSL 0.9.7d 17 Mar 2004

Global options
cert            = /usr/local/etc/stunnel/stunnel.pem
ciphers         = ALL:!ADH:+RC4:@STRENGTH
debug           = 5
key             = /usr/local/etc/stunnel/stunnel.pem
pid             = /var/tmp/stunnel.pid
RNDbytes        = 64
RNDfile         = /dev/urandom
RNDoverwrite    = yes
session         = 300 seconds
verify          = none

Service-level options
TIMEOUTbusy     = 300 seconds
TIMEOUTclose    = 60 seconds
TIMEOUTconnect  = 10 seconds
TIMEOUTidle     = 43200 seconds

uname -a:
FreeBSD ozelmo.wuhjuhbuh.afraid.org 5.3-RELEASE-p15 FreeBSD
5.3-RELEASE-p15 #0: Mon May 30 10:04:43 EDT 2005    
root at ozelmo.wuhjuhbuh.afraid.org:/junk1/usr-obj/usr/src/sys/OZELMO  i386

openssl version:
OpenSSL 0.9.7d 17 Mar 2004

Thanks again... Sorry for the extra noise

> Howdy...
>
> I'm trying to run samba over stunnel on a wireless connection. Here's the
> setup:
> unix box <- wifi -> windows laptop
>
> Unfortunately, reading files from the shared drive is extremely slow.
>
> If I look at the stunnel box on my windows machine, it is pumping out
> about 20 messages/second that say:
> LOG7[2140:3636]: SSL_read returned WANT_READ: retrying
>
> On two >1GHz machines, this is utilizing about 5% of cpu, and 4% of the
> 11Mbps link. Clearly there is room for improvement here!
>
> I tried poking around with stunnel.conf on the server to no avail -
> specifically, I commented out the lines:
> ; Some performance tunings
> socket = l:TCP_NODELAY=1
> socket = r:TCP_NODELAY=1
> ;compression = rle
>
> And restarted stunnel - same miserable performance (roughly the same
> throughput, and resource usage).
>
> Is there something about the SMB protocol that would cause stunnel to not
> deal with it well? If so, is there a configuration option somewhere I can
> tune, or do I have to RTFS & hack it to get decent performance here?
>
> Any tips would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!
>
> Cheers,
> Brian
>
> Brian Szymanski
> Software and Systems Developer
> Media Matters for America
> ski at mediamatters.org
> aim:   xbrianskix
>
>

Brian Szymanski
Software and Systems Developer
Media Matters for America
ski at mediamatters.org
cell:  202.243.9007
work:  202.756.4128
home:  240.949.2461
skype: xbrianskix
aim:   xbrianskix