Hello Robin, On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Salz, Rich <rs...@akamai.com> wrote:
> (I subscribed you to openssl-dev; I hope it works.) > > ISO standards are “pay to play.” That is, any member organization can get > something as an ISO standard with not much effort. :) > > >> "I strongly recommend that if anyone works on this, they do it as an > externally-provided ENGINE, like GOST. " > > Again, I'm sorry I have not a clear notion about the difference > between build-in approach, and certainly we will take this if necessary. > > >> "We may also not have the resources to tackle something that would > otherwise be of interest (we have a back catalog of nice-to-have > cryptography waiting for a rainy day)" > > We certainly respect policy within community and be willing to > participate in this if possible in all aspects. > > You will have to learn how to write an ENGINE. It is possible; Dmitry did > it for GOST (look in the mailing list archives, https://mta.openssl.org, > for some details; also maybe the Git log. Also maybe he'll reply to this > post :) Richard Levitte has started a blog series on writing an ENGINE, > see https://www.openssl.org/blog/blog/categories/engine-corner/ Sure. I'll be glad to assist. > > We want to make it easier to add new crypto via ENGINES. Each time > someone does it, we learn more about what's needed, the documentation gets > (a little) better, and so on. > > The best solution will be providing a skeleton engine (with a skeleton Makefile example). -- SY, Dmitry Belyavsky
-- openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev