4 ms·

So does this happen for every single request? or is this based on a single session.

• sgwae 8y ago
  This is what happens under the hood of every ping request.
  • noselasd 8y ago
    ping would refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ping_(networking_utility) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ping_(networking_utility) in this context, which is quite unrelated to TLS.
  • deaps 8y ago
    A ping is very much different. A ping is (typically) simply an ICMP Echo Request, (not TCP, thus no TLS, etc). The receiving device, if accepting echo requests and configured to reply with echo replies, then responds with an ICMP Echo Reply - or some device in the middle (or the device itself could respond with an ICMP unreachable, or some other response - or quite simply drop the ICMP Echo Request entirely and silently). *Edited an incorrect UDP reference out based on the below comment.
    • gear54rus 8y ago
      If I'm not mistaken, its not UDP, it's ICMP, like you said
      • deaps 8y ago
        Ahh yeah - good call. Totally different protocol. I guess ICMP more closely resembles UDP at the end of the day, but you're absolutely right. I edited out the incorrect UDP reference so that a person reading for the first time will not get misled. Thanks!
        • e12e 8y ago
          Which is also why some poorly configured network devices firewalls will eat pings - if they for example whitelist tcp and udp protocols and drop everything else (yes, that's a bad idea). https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/22711/is-it-a-bad-idea-for-a-firewall-to-block-icmp https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/22711/is-it-a-b...
• Brotkrumen 8y ago
  Per session.
  • logicallee 8y ago
    Unrelated but: based on your understanding of establishing a TLS session with a server, and then traffic through that connection, do you think the new Gmail user interface for the web (desktop) is sufficiently speedy? The reason I ask in this thread is that this thread treats some of the low-level minimum traffic necessary between clients and servers.
    • nebulous1 8y ago
      Sufficiently speedy for what? It's not clear what you're asking. Gmail obviously runs over TLS. It also seem pretty nippy to me, but TLS only has a minor impact on the speed.
      • logicallee 8y ago
        >It also seem pretty nippy to me OK. (my experience since the redesign is the opposite.)
        • nimos 8y ago
          The TLS overhead is pretty negligible for gmail. Even though there are a lot of steps here it is only 2 round trips for the handshake. Gmail will also use TLS 1.3 (this is 1.2) if your browser supports it which cuts that down to one round trip.[0] https://www.cloudflare.com/learning-resources/tls-1-3/ https://www.cloudflare.com/learning-resources/tls-1-3/
    • taco_emoji 8y ago
      What does TLS have to do with the Gmail redesign? It used TLS before the redesign, didn't it?
      • logicallee 8y ago
• syncsynchalt 8y ago
  The two "application data" records at the bottom are what would wrap around a request/response for an established connection - you can see how much is added to make the strings "ping" and "pong" (though some of that is padding to expand it to a multiple of 16 bytes). And much of the rest of the records might go away completely if the session were resumed from the client's memory (this wasn't demonstrated here).