On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 07:03:10PM +0000, Mcnamara, John wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Neil Horman > > Sent: Friday, July 8, 2016 2:42 PM > > To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com> > > Cc: De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com>; dev at > > dpdk.org; > > Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson at intel.com>; Stephen Hemminger > > <stephen at networkplumber.org>; Panu Matilainen <pmatilai at redhat.com> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] crypto: normalize cryptodev pmd names with > > macros > > > > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 02:40:01PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 2016-07-08 08:17, Neil Horman: > > > > I suppose thats fine, sure, though I'm really not comfortable with > > > > an open source project requiring what appears to be non-open source > > > > components (though I can't really tell what the snow3g or kasumi > > license is). > > > > > > Yes you're right. > > > IMHO, it is acceptable because it is free (just need a registration) > > > but it can be discussed. > > > I think there are some legal export issues because of crypto aim. > > Yeah, crypto usually has munitions export restrictions. I'm fine with > > that, as long as the license to the code is GPL. And I can't tell what > > the license is because you have to register to get it before you can see > > it. > > > > If you, or someone can confirm that the snow3g and kasumi ssl libraries > > are open source compatible (or better still if the license can be > > announced prior to registration on the web site), then I'm fine with it, > > and am happy to test with it, I just don't want to register without > > knowing that beforehand. > > Hi Neil, > > The license is "Intel Pre-Release Software License Agreement". We will send a > patch to make this this clear in the documentation. We will also see if it > can be made visible on the download page. > > I can send you a copy of the license if you wish. Pablo has already tested > compilation with the latest version of the patch. > I understand and appreciate that, but I'd still like to have a copy of the license. It seems a bit unreasonable to me to include open source drivers in an open source project, if they can't be built without a non-open source library included.
Neil > John > >
