Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 13:29:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 13:29:34 -0400 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:42757 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 13:29:33 -0400 Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 10:35:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Dax Kelson cc: Alan Cox , "Kendrick M. Smith" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "nfs@lists.sourceforge.net" , , Subject: Re: Will NFSv4 be accepted? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1197 Lines: 28 On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Dax Kelson wrote: > > Q for Linus: What's the prospect of adding crypto to the kernel? For a good enough excuse, and with a good enough argument that it's not likely to be a big export problem, I don't think it's impossible any more. However, the "good enough excuse" has to be better than "some technically excellent, but not very widespread" thing. Quite frankly, I personally suspect that crypto is one of those things that will be added by vendor kernels first - if vendors are willing to handle whatever export issues there are, that's good, and if they aren't, then the standard kernel cannot really force it upon them anyway. I personally doubt that NFS would be the thing driving this. Judging by past performance, NFS security issues don't seem to bother people. I'd personally assume that the thing that would be important enough to people for vendors to add it is VPN or encrypted (local) disks. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/