On 07/11/2012 05:10 PM, David Magda wrote: > On Wed, July 11, 2012 09:45, Sašo Kiselkov wrote: > >> I'm not convinced waiting makes much sense. The SHA-3 standardization >> process' goals are different from "ours". SHA-3 can choose to go with >> something that's slower, but has a higher security margin. I think that >> absolute super-tight security isn't all that necessary for ZFS, since >> the hash isn't used for security purposes. We only need something that's >> fast and has a good pseudo-random output distribution. That's why I >> looked toward Edon-R. Even though it might have security problems in >> itself, it's by far the fastest algorithm in the entire competition. > > Fair enough, though I think eventually the SHA-3 winner will be > incorporated into hardware (or at least certain instructions used in the > algorithm will). I think waiting a few more weeks/months shouldn't be a > big deal, as the winner should be announced Real Soon Now, and then a more > informed decision can probably be made.
The AES process winner had been announced in October 2000. Considering AES-NI was proposed in March 2008 and first silicon for it appeared around January 2010, I wouldn't hold my breath hoping for hardware SHA-3-specific acceleration getting a widespread foothold for at least another 5-10 years (around 2-3 technology generations). That being said, a lot can be achieved using SIMD instructions, but that doesn't depend on the SHA-3 process in any way. -- Saso _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
