[Cryptech Core] Questions regarding existing documentation

[Heather Flanagan]

Hello all,

I've gone through every page listed in the trac sitemap to figure out
what information is available to go in a revised wiki structure. Before
I request an edit-hold on anything, I have some questions for the team.
Apologies for the length; if it would be easier for me to break this up
into one message per query, let me know.

Thanks,
Heather

------

0. Is the ASIC still under consideration, or is that to be recorded as a
path not followed? (query re:
http://trac.cryptech.is/wiki/ASICImplementations)

1. With the Novena board as the prototype of choice, do we want/need the
documentation on the TerasIC C5G Board? (query re:
http://trac.cryptech.is/wiki/CoretestHashesC5G)

2. For the pages that include a plan or roadmap (e.g.,
http://trac.cryptech.is/wiki/AlphaBoardStrategy) are there tickets or
publicly archived email thread that document the specific items for
reference?

3. The following git repositories listed on the top level git
repositories page do not have README files. Are these repositories still
in use, and if so, who will write the README files for them?
core/math/modexps6
doc/design
doc/presentations
test/external_avalanche_entropy
user/ft/stm32-dev-bridge
user/js/test/novena_eim_base
user/paul/releng
user/shatov/gost/streebog_tester
user/shatov/gost/streebog

4. Having the list of git repositories in one place is a good thing. Is
there any reason not to link to specific repositories and/or READMEs in
the body of the documentation on the wiki?

5. Not all git repositories shown in the trac sitemap are listed on the
master Git Repositories page. Is there any reason not to include these
on the master page for a single complete list of active repositories?
Examples:
GitRepositories/core/aes
GitRepositories/core/avalanche_entropy
GitRepositories/core/chacha
GitRepositories/core/cipher
...
These and other repositories can be found when going to to sub-pages
like GitRepositories/core or GitRepositories/comm. I do not propose
removing the sub-pages, but it seems odd to have a top level page that
doesn't have everything, unless there's a reason for it (i.e., those are
the pages someone wanting to play around with cryptech will need,
whereas the other pages might be archival at this point).

6. There is one team member bio on the site and two pointers to off-site
bios. Are other team members going to put information up? It makes for
interesting reading when talking about the project. (query re:
http://trac.cryptech.is/wiki/WhoWeAre)

7. Do you want to keep the list of SSH keys from the Praha workshop on
the wiki? (query re: http://trac.cryptech.is/wiki/PrahaWorkshopSSH)

8. Is the Project Management page still useful and/or required? If you
are using the ProjectManagement page to help make clear the resources
required as you ask for funding, perhaps include the time frame
expected? This page begs the question: 4-5 FTE for how long? Travel &
Overhead of $7K per month for how many months?

9. Should early prototype work be moved to an archive at this point?
(query re: http://trac.cryptech.is/wiki/RoughV1)

10. Should the 2014-11-06 state of play be moved to an archive at this
point? Can I convince anyone to write an update? (query re:
http://trac.cryptech.is/wiki/StateOfPlay)

11. Was the SUnet funded work completed? Should this page be updated or
moved to an archive? (query re:
http://trac.cryptech.is/wiki/SunetInitialDevelopment)

12. As the project has settled on a source of randomness, can this page
be removed and the link added to Related Work? (query re:
http://trac.cryptech.is/wiki/TRNGDevelopment)