Hi, I am sending this patch as RFC, since the change is likely to create interoperability issues. I'd like to get some comments on what should be the correct approach in this standard vs. de facto setup.
Note that an older commit (which is no longer in git's history, but can be found here https://archive.org/details/git-history-of-linux) changed truncated ICV size from 128bit to 96bit: commit 627d1054055f465603bcfb7ef5c9adc5db9b2a53 Author: Michal Ludvig <mic...@logix.cz> Date: Fri Jan 9 04:55:59 2004 -0800 [XFRM]: SHA2-256 should be truncated to 96 bits, not 128. It seems that initially the sha256 ICV was truncated to 128 bits, but later changed to 96 bits due to interoperability issues - see comment here: http://oss.sgi.com/archives/netdev/2004-01/msg00824.html Note that commit above is from 2004, long before RFC4868 was released (2007). Thanks, Horia Lei Xu (1): xfrm: make sha256 icv truncation length RFC-compliant net/xfrm/xfrm_algo.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) -- 1.8.3.1 -- 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/
