Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 08:07:46 +0200 From: Mark Murray <mark@grimreaper.grondar.za> To: "Jeroen C. van Gelderen" <jeroen@vangelderen.org> Cc: Dan Moschuk <dan@FreeBSD.org>, Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>, arch@FreeBSD.org, phk@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: (2nd iteration) New /dev/(random|null|zero) - review, please Message-ID: <200006070607.IAA24428@gratis.grondar.za> In-Reply-To: <393D5D46.6BCACDE4@vangelderen.org> ; from "Jeroen C. van Gelderen" <jeroen@vangelderen.org> "Tue, 06 Jun 2000 16:21:26 -0400." References: <393D5D46.6BCACDE4@vangelderen.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Because of the significant speed decrease in using Yarrow, I'd like to see > > us keep the current implementation around, and having Yarrow as an > > option or psuedo-device to be used instead. > > Yarrow -when finished- is not noticably slower than our current > implementation of /dev/[u]random. Yarrow does one block encryption > for every output block and a generator gate every 10 blocks. This > would allow for at least 40 mbit/s output on a 200 Mhz PPro when > using Rijndael/256/256. I tend to agree; I am currently using SHA1 and DES3, and it is quite slow, mostly in the proportion of DES3::MD5 speeds, which makes sense as the existing implementation uses MD5. M -- Mark Murray Join the anti-SPAM movement: http://www.cauce.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200006070607.IAA24428>