Subject: [Ipsec] OT: cryptographic parameters - performance data

From: "Bob Arthurs" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 09:25:45 +0000

hello again,

in my research on the use of cryptographic parameters for use with ipsec, i 
have been trying to find some performace data on the various cryptogrpahic 
algorithms.

any help much appreciated once again.

i have manged to find some info on AES in the book 'The Design of Rijndael', 
and i have found some info on sha-1 and md5 in:

http://www.netsys.com/ipsec/1996/msg00585.html

i am wondering whether anybody know if there is any freely available (on the 
web/in a book) on the relative performance of sha-1/md5 and 
des/3des/aes/seal ??

On a second point, could anyone tell me what specific advantages of using 
the same cryptographic parameters (encryption/hash algorithms) for both IKE 
and IPSec SAs? instinctively it seems better, but is it fair to say that it 
will improve performance between peers if the the same algorithms are used, 
and if so why in particular?

many thanks for answering my questions

_________________________________________________________________
Want to block unwanted pop-ups? Download the free MSN Toolbar now!  
http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/

_______________________________________________
Ipsec mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

---

From: Joern Sierwald <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 17:20:54 +0200

At 09:25 11.06.2004 +0000, Bob Arthurs wrote:
>hello again,
>
>in my research on the use of cryptographic parameters for use with ipsec, 
>i have been trying to find some performace data on the various 
>cryptogrpahic algorithms.
>

To post the obvious one: openssl (installed with every linux) has speed 
tests. run them!
"openssl speed ?" will tell you how to do it.

On my computer md5 was exactly twice as fast as sha1.
I was too lazy to run the encryption tests.

>the same cryptographic parameters (encryption/hash algorithms) for both 
>IKE and IPSec SAs? instinctively it seems better, but is it fair to say 
>that it will improve performance between peers if the the same algorithms 
>are used, and if so why in particular?

For phase 1, the symmetric encryption algorithm and the hmac do not matter 
at all.
 >90% of the CPU time is consumed by big number math for RSA and 
Diffie-Hellman.

Using the same algorithms for both IKA and IPSec SAs does not provide any 
benefit at all. I can think of only
one academical argument: if they are the same, the other available 
algorithms can be paged out, saving memory.
Also CPU cache hits might be better if they are the same. But in reality... 
Come on. P1 only happens once per hour...

Jörn Sierwald

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 13:20:38 -0400

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>>>>> "Bob" == Bob Arthurs <[email-masked]> writes:
    Bob> On a second point, could anyone tell me what specific
    Bob> advantages of using the same cryptographic parameters
    Bob> (encryption/hash algorithms) for both IKE and IPSec SAs? 

  Simplicity in documentation of configuration parameters.
  
    Bob> instinctively it seems better, but is it fair to say that it
    Bob> will improve performance between peers if the the same
    Bob> algorithms are used, and if so why in particular?

  It would be a very unusual implementation where this was true.

  I can't think of a way even construct a system where this would be
true.

- --
]     "Elmo went to the wrong fundraiser" - The Simpson         |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson,    Xelerance Corporation, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] [email-masked]      http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/mcr/ |device driver[
] panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [

---

From: Wes Hardaker <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 13:25:58 -0700

>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 09:25:45 +0000, "Bob Arthurs" <[email-masked]> said:

Bob> i am wondering whether anybody know if there is any freely available
Bob> (on the web/in a book) on the relative performance of sha-1/md5 and
Bob> des/3des/aes/seal ??

I did some tests once using the NIST IPsec stack running on two
machines and using netperf gathered data about the rate the two of the
machines could talk to each other.  In the following results,
no-encryption and no-authentication (IE, no tunnel at all) is a 100
and thus the rest of the numbers are the speed percentage of this base
line that it dropped to.

                  None            HMAC-MD5-96     HMAC-SHA-96   

None              100             76              65            
DES/CBC           51              47              43            
3DES/CBC          34              32              30            
AES/128           47              44              38            
IDEA/CBC          50              45              41            
RC5/CBC           62              53              49            
Blowfish/CBC      51              47              42            

-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta