[openssl-dev] OpenSSL 1.1.0 Release Timetable

[Zooko Wilcox-OHearn]

> There's probably a ton of other stuff that I've forgotten and my
> colleagues will remind me about.

There's BLAKE2. It already has mature and widely-used source code,
including multiple independently-written portable C implementations,
and Bill Cox has offered to integrate those into openssl:

https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-dev/2015-June/001791.html

In light of the previous conversation and the way it ground to a halt,
I would ask that we do the simple, easy thing now and don't re-raise
any of the bike shed questions, so:

* Don't implement the parallelized versions (BLAKE2bp and BLAKE2sp).
* Don't change the names of the algorithms from "BLAKE2b" and
"BLAKE2s" (they are already widely known under those names).
* Don't integrate any of the optimized asm implementations, just a
single portable C implementation.

There. That ought to do it!

The previous thread — in which I argued that BLAKE2 is worth
supporting — starts here:

https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-dev/2015-June/001688.html

Since I wrote that post, BLAKE2 has been promoted from Internet Draft
to RFC. It doesn't have its RFC number yet but should get one any day
now:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saarinen-blake2/

Regards,

Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn

Founder, CEO, and Customer Support Rep
https://LeastAuthority.com — Freedom matters.