In another forum, it was suggested that UMAC_DATA_SIZE be renamed to UMAC_BLOCK_SIZE, and for consistency one could do the same with, e.g., MD5_DATA_SIZE. For the time being, the old names should be kept for backwards compatibility.

Unlike block sizes for ciphers, these *_DATA_SIZE constants are rarely needed by applications; they are in the public headers mainly because they determine the buffer sizes in the context structs, and they are also needed for the HMAC construction. So the naming is not totally illogical, but I think using *_BLOCK_SIZE would be more consistent.

What do you think?

Regards, /Niels

-- Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26. Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance.