Re: [babel] [Babel-users] rather than ripemd160...

Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> Fri, 30 November 2018 10:41 UTC

Return-Path: <toke@toke.dk>
X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AA8B130DD2 for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 02:41:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ii2xl1I1aIYJ for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 02:41:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9623412D4EC for <babel@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 02:41:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= <toke@toke.dk>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1543574462; bh=AnYFgSoZJaFmbrN77fD3bwKfHHAiwypLAtDN08MS+Rs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=PiY9iRuxcCNQHQo7zmVHeeSqHExDRtiuUpQulZWmyHy7DVFA7Q4vhcjtEU1Log9Gr wbd6mci7OdVQM3T1HMbImA43o/n0ecsKGVEyXt7CNA9U/xjLqQaf5XmfwUI062199P t2eXpd6vKPr2M9DTSDIrpssM+gRrH/ijjFDZ9AD62ngrya1/kQEeuPy/4FeLKmE0mk jVsQt6W+Ptd3bOngUTTg/fyrsk274bECEYCPKsTNVLwiynLyasVjlGMjzmKmo6J/ef 8jHBg47rahGLNl/8tAP3alPvgRggm8LGtAKr/uFr3E3DMAdkx06FC/5hBSLoBSbX1G H0EAQ/lUqAf+g==
To: Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi>, Dave =?utf-8?Q?T=C3=A4ht?= <dave@taht.net>
Cc: babel@ietf.org, babel-users <babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org>
In-Reply-To: <1C6B19AE-EAA7-4329-A364-8E4C059DAC01@iki.fi>
References: <CAA93jw5fHRm21yEJsabiiOF1ZP7Zh3M_gEgRo0imBOpRGhf0qA@mail.gmail.com> <87in0koun6.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87in0kx98o.fsf@toke.dk> <CAA93jw5gaYgyUX-ABX156_TnFX25Sy5SLyuRgd28fMLfRW4UHA@mail.gmail.com> <871s78x7z0.fsf@toke.dk> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DF44154@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87pnurwo5e.fsf@toke.dk> <CAPDSy+5QDu_kW-f=JWO1cPJJnDwDNpVwxwVC9SxfcE5+EOMpRg@mail.gmail.com> <87o9a9v3c6.fsf@toke.dk> <875zwhxv28.wl-jch@irif.fr> <8736rl16yj.fsf@taht.net> <87lg5cxuql.fsf@taht.net> <1C6B19AE-EAA7-4329-A364-8E4C059DAC01@iki.fi>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 11:41:00 +0100
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Message-ID: <87woouq24j.fsf@toke.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/17YY0z4-Igxn051c20RfR6M1oZg>
Subject: Re: [babel] [Babel-users] rather than ripemd160...
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." <babel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/babel/>
List-Post: <mailto:babel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 10:41:39 -0000

Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi> writes:

> Here's some raw numbers (clickbait):
>
> - my Macbook (sanity check)
> - Turris Omnia (2016 highend)
> - Buffalo WZR-600DHP (2012 midend)
>
> https://github.com/fingon/go-hashperf
>
> TL;DR (probably the interesting part):
>
> 2012 midend home router does 40 bytes:
> - 37.5k pps of SHA256
> - bit over 40k pps of Blake2B
> - 91k pps of Blake2S

That's is awesome, thanks for doing this!

> Setup overhead disappears both in SHA256 and Blake2 at ~500 byte mark
> (500 and 1200 bytes roughly equal MB/s); with 200 byte packets setup
> still wastes ~1/4 of performance (both SHA256 and Blake2) and even
> more with 40 byte packets.
>
> With these numbers, I withdraw my support of including anything else
> than SHA256 as MTI. I think specifying Blake2B or 2S as well makes
> sense (mostly for crypto robustness reasons for having alternative
> that is specified) but making it MAY-SHOULD seems sensible to me.

I can probably live with that :)

> The code is there, go ahead to test on your own routers if you care. I
> didn't bother testing arm64 in the end, as those are even faster than
> arm (the ridiculous blake2s number of 460k pps for Blake2s on Turris
> Omnia convinced me that it is not really worth it to test on faster
> hardware).

Yeah, 460k pps ought to be enough for everyone ;)

-Toke