On Fri, Jun 02, 2000 at 04:07:26AM -0700, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> Why don't we just do something like this? Aim to make any crypto
> components of the kernel modularizeable. Perhaps even attempt to make them
> compilable outside of a normal kernel source tree. It might be slightly
> ineffecient to have to do a table lookup to determine if crypto is
> available at runtime, but does it cost us that much?
This seems to be the gist of what David Marshall was suggesting.
Moving the infrastructure out of the kerneli patch and into the main
kernel distribution, and whatever unencumbered implementations
possible. This appears to make sense. Who's willing to work on
defining the crypto API and setting this up?
Any comments from Alexander Kjeldaas or any of the other people
involved in the international kernel patch?
-- -/ |/| Julian Squires <tek@wiw.org> /-
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 21:00:15 EST