----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Miller" <da...@davemloft.net>
> To: tstde...@elliptictech.com
> Cc: "steffen klassert" <steffen.klass...@secunet.com>, 
> herb...@gondor.apana.org.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
> net...@vger.kernel.org
> Sent: Friday, 18 January, 2013 2:50:05 PM
> Subject: Re: IPsec AH use of ahash
> 
> From: Tom St Denis <tstde...@elliptictech.com>
> Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:35:33 -0500 (EST)
> 
> > Any "maintainers" going to reply to this at all?
> 
> What do you mean?  There was a reply, and the reply if someone
> so skilled finds this facility useful they can feel free to
> submit an implementation.
> 
> You can't force people to work on something they have no interest
> in, especially when it's effectively a new feature.
> 

Admittedly I'm new to the kernel scene but what exactly is a "maintainer" then?

Suppose I invest time to re-write the IPv4/v6 AH code to correctly use AEAD 
instead of ahash, to then perform the testing required, etc... do I get credit 
as a maintainer in the IPsec tree?

I'm also a little annoyed that my CMAC patch was rejected for among other 
reasons that it violated "coding standards."  Specially since it was almost 
entirely copied from crypto/xcbc.c which also violates the same rules.  As a 
newcomer to the tree I tried my best by emulating readily available code (which 
apparently was already accepted into the tree) to then just get shot down for 
attempting to contribute.  If my CMAC code is not good enough for the tree I 
humbly suggest you also remove the XCBC code too while we're at it.

What I would expect from the "maintainers" is that they actually take on a more 
than trivial involvement in the progress of the code.  If I have to create 
original content and massage it into whatever form pleases the owners of the 
tree am I not the maintainer of the code?  I was honestly expecting someone 
with more involvement in the tree to move the [in this case] CMAC patch 
forward.  

As for the AH side if it's the implied intent of the maintainers to not support 
all relevant [and ideally low hanging fruit] standards as possible this should 
be stated explicitly.

Tom
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to