Re: [Babel-users] [babel] HMAC and MTI [was: rather than ripemd160...]

[Juliusz Chroboczek]

> Dave had a good point as well though, comparing -2s and -2b performance
> on some set of hardware (e.g. arm, mips, intel) might be in order before
> picking between the two.

HMAC only protects the control traffic, not the data traffic.  I'm not
convinced that performance is particularly critical here.

-- Juliusz

___
Babel-users mailing list
Babel-users@alioth-lists.debian.net
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users

Re: [Babel-users] [babel] HMAC and MTI [was: rather than ripemd160...]

[Toke Høiland-Jørgensen]

Markus Stenberg  writes:

> On 26 Nov 2018, at 15.46, Juliusz Chroboczek  wrote:
>>> I'm not sure if we *can* make [blake2s] MTI in the spec as well (does it
>>> need to be defined by a standards track RFC for us to do that?), but if
>>> we can, I think we should seriously consider it...
>> Opinions?
>
> I like Blake (family of) hash functions so on that front +1; however,
> no idea how bureaucracy works.
>
> Dave had a good point as well though, comparing -2s and -2b
> performance on some set of hardware (e.g. arm, mips, intel) might be
> in order before picking between the two. I am not convinced -2s is the
> way _forward_. Even now most of hardware in my home is already 64bit
> ..

Right, sure. I guess I can start by putting both into Bird, and we can
benchmark that...

-Toke

___
Babel-users mailing list
Babel-users@alioth-lists.debian.net
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users