Repository request: mldsa-native

[mkannwischer]

I'd like to request a new repository/sub-project mldsa-native which is going to be an implementation of ML-DSA (FIPS-204) targeting PC, mobile and server platforms. The scope and goals are similar to mlkem-native: State-of-the-art performance on x86_64 and Arm64 with CBMC proofs for all C code and HOL Light proofs for the native code.
It is initially going to be maintained by https://github.com/jakemas (Jake Massimo, AWS), @hanno-becker, and @mkannwischer.
Thanks to https://github.com/jakemas for offering to help with this!

@planetf1 could you please initiate getting this approved by the TSC? Let me know if additional information is required. https://github.com/jakemas also expressed interest in becoming a member of the TSC.

• GitHub repo to create: https://github.com/pq-code-package/mldsa-native
• Teams with which access: (examples on GitHub team list)
  • Team name: pqcp-mldsa-native-admin (consisting of https://github.com/jakemas, @hanno-becker, and @mkannwischer). Let's use a new team for this.
  • Role:
    • Admin

Related to #94.

[ryjones]

when approved file a PR here to create an empty repo.

[planetf1]

Thanks for raising @mkannwischer - that's fantastic news that a ml-dsa implementation is being developed.

We should arrange a TSC vote for the proposal - it can be offline rather than face to face. Our charter doesn't lay down any specific rules around this. I

I don't think we have to have a lot in place - you've identified the maintainers, so I think it's more a few legal aspects ie

• What is the origin of this code.
• how is it currently licensed?
• what is the proposed license (Apache 2.0 preferred)
• can we be assured that during the submission/hackathon this license (or similar) is adhered to

With that answered I propose we ask the LF to send out a vote (later/tomorrow). Hopefully that can end later if enough of the TSC approve. I think it's good to have that decision documented. I'll ping Kenny now.

I would then suggest that the proposed lead for the project present at the next TSC, and at that point we also start a vote on having a new TSC member?

[mkannwischer]

Thanks @planetf1!

Thanks for raising @mkannwischer - that's fantastic news that a ml-dsa implementation is being developed.

We should arrange a TSC vote for the proposal - it can be offline rather than face to face. Our charter doesn't lay down any specific rules around this. I

I don't think we have to have a lot in place - you've identified the maintainers, so I think it's more a few legal aspects ie

• What is the origin of this code.

Just like for mlkem-native, it will be based on the pqcrystals implementation: https://github.com/pq-crystals/dilithium
We will add some AArch64 assembly from https://github.com/slothy-optimizer/slothy.
This will require a bit of work to have a clean frontend/backend split which will happen over the next months in the new repository.

• how is it currently licensed?
• what is the proposed license (Apache 2.0 preferred)

We will use Apache 2.0

pqcrystals code is dual-licensed Apache 2.0 and CC0: https://github.com/pq-crystals/dilithium/blob/master/LICENSE
Code from SLOTHY is MIT licensed (e.g., this)

New code written, will be Apache 2.0 licensed.

• can we be assured that during the submission/hackathon this license (or similar) is adhered to

We will ensure that through CI and code reviews as usual.

With that answered I propose we ask the LF to send out a vote (later/tomorrow). Hopefully that can end later if enough of the TSC approve. I think it's good to have that decision documented. I'll ping Kenny now.

I would then suggest that the proposed lead for the project present at the next TSC, and at that point we also start a vote on having a new TSC member?

Sounds great thank you!

[planetf1]

Thanks for the info. I suggest we ask TSC Members to comment below giving their approval (so that we have agreement documented). We don't need a formal vote (also checked with Kenny), so let's get approval from 50% of TSC via comments on this issue.

I approve, and I take your proposal as approval.

@hanno-becker @dstebila @tfaoliveira @praveksharma @franziskuskiefer @mbbarbosa @jschanck - please indicate your agreement or disagreement with this proposal to create a mldsa-native below

[hanno-becker]

Agree

[praveksharma]

I approve.

[franziskuskiefer]

I approve.

[dstebila]

I approve (voting since #134 hasn't landed yet).

[tfaoliveira]

I agree.

[mbbarbosa]

I agree as well.

[planetf1]

I make that 8 or 9 TSC voting members approving.

So @mkannwischer let's go ahead with the technical stuff to make it happen!

[mkannwischer]

Great :). I have prepared that in #136 already. Please go ahead and merge that @planetf1.

[planetf1]

@mkannwischer done.