[dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 1/4] rte_security: API definitions

Hemant Agrawal hemant.agrawal at nxp.com
Fri Aug 18 14:20:50 CEST 2017


On 8/18/2017 2:46 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 16/08/2017 17:40, Hemant Agrawal:
>> Hi Thomas,
>> 	Can we get a next-security tree to do development around this proposal?
>>
>> Also, we can discuss about this proposal in general in next techboard meeting.
>
> First question to ask:
> Why not create a repository elsewhere for your trials?
>
github is a good place, but I heard some companies (e.g. Intel) may have 
concerns over posting the work to github.

> The benefit of creating a dpdk.org repo is to show it as an official feature.
> So the idea behind this new library must be accepted by the technical board first.
>
agree. we will discuss it in next tech board meeting.

> The other use of official repos is prepare pull request for subsequent releases.
> Do we want to have a -next tree for IPsec development and keep it for next releases?
>
I believe it will be required for few release. In future, this work can 
merge and maintained in next-crypto. However this may change as we develop.

> I think it makes sense to have a -next tree for IPsec offloading in general.
> Before the techboard approves it, we need to define the name (and the scope)
> of the tree, and who will be the maintainer of the tree.
>
I see following individual maintaining it :
1. Akhil Goyal (akhil.goyal at nxp.com)
2. Boris (borisp at mellanox.com)
3. Declan Doherty (declan.doherty at intel.com)

Regards,
Hemant



More information about the dev mailing list