[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce move of aes gmac algorithm to aead

Kusztal, ArkadiuszX arkadiuszx.kusztal at intel.com
Mon Aug 31 08:34:00 CEST 2020


Hi Thomas,

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net> 
Sent: piątek, 7 sierpnia 2020 23:49
To: Kusztal, ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusztal at intel.com>
Cc: dev at dpdk.org; akhil.goyal at nxp.com; anoobj at marvell.com; Doherty, Declan <declan.doherty at intel.com>; Trahe, Fiona <fiona.trahe at intel.com>; asomalap at amd.com; rnagadheeraj at marvell.com; hemant.agrawal at nxp.com; De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com>; Zhang, Roy Fan <roy.fan.zhang at intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce move of aes gmac algorithm to aead

05/08/2020 17:15, Arek Kusztal:
> This patch announces removal of RTE_CRYPTO_AUTH_AES_GMAC from 
> rte_crypto_auth_algorithm and addition of RTE_CRYPTO_AEAD_AES_GMAC to 
> rte_crypto_aead_algorithm.
> AES-GMAC is variation of AES-GCM algorithm with the difference that it 
> does not perform encryption. As a matter of fact internally there is 
> no difference between GMAC and GCM except for the way how data is 
> passed.
> Moving GMAC to AEAD can simplify way of implementing this alogrithm 
> for example in IPsec (RFC4543).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arek Kusztal <arkadiuszx.kusztal at intel.com>
> ---
> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
> +* cryptodev: ``RTE_CRYPTO_AUTH_AES_GMAC`` will no longer be included 
> +in
> +  ``enum rte_crypto_auth_algorithm``. It will be included in
> +  ``enum rte_crypto_aead_algorithm`` as ``RTE_CRYPTO_AEAD_AES_GMAC``.

I wonder whether this move shows a problem in classification of the crypto algorithms.
[Arek] - it is not particularly bad that GMAC is auth algorithm, it really depends on lib (openssl PMD internally uses conformant approach I have suggested in other mail).
But from what I currently see GMAC as AEAD is preferred way, I think this subject may be back in future.
Anyway this proposal didn't meet its audience.
Because of the lack of ack (3 required), it cannot be accepted.




More information about the dev mailing list