From: Adrian-Ken Rueegsegger Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] [XFRM] xfrm_algo: correct usage of RIPEMD-160 Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 09:09:40 +0200 Message-ID: <48439CB4.5090809@swiss-it.ch> References: <1212340578-15574-1-git-send-email-rueegsegger@swiss-it.ch> <1212340578-15574-2-git-send-email-rueegsegger@swiss-it.ch> <20080602065132.GA11128@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc> <48439AF0.30508@swiss-it.ch> <20080602070456.GA21479@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Sebastian Siewior , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org To: Herbert Xu Return-path: Received: from zux006-004-203.adsl.green.ch ([81.6.4.203]:58233 "EHLO mailx.swiss-it.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752028AbYFBHJn (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2008 03:09:43 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080602070456.GA21479@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Herbert Xu wrote: > On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 09:02:08AM +0200, Adrian-Ken Rueegsegger wrote: >> Yes, that would be the other way to do it. Is there a preference or specific reason >> for renaming the hash algorithm than changing the reference to the algorithm? > > I think the rmd name is fine. The existing entry in IPsec has > never worked (since we didn't have the implementation) so it > isn't an issue. Ok thanks for the clarification. I will resubmit the patch to the addresses you specified. I assume linux-crypto should also be cc'd? Adrian