[29506] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: public key service
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Shawn McMahon)
Tue Jun 27 08:10:00 2000
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 08:07:50 -0400
From: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon@eiv.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20000627080750.D2063@eiv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.QNWS_2.0006261456430.6831-100000@thetis.deor.org>; from rabbi@quickie.net on Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 11:21:54PM -0700
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 11:21:54PM -0700, L. Sassaman wrote:
>
> > how can providers help? and now, not in the vague future.
>
> Immediately? Multiple providers could set up a series of servers that all
> syncronize with each other in a load-balanced system where they all share
> the same hostname, so that the user doesn't have to search for a working
> server when one goes down.
I'm going to try to keep this operational, but it's hard because you're
going to find that support for making a robust keyserver network hinges upon
people agreeing that such a service is needed, and many PGP users are going
to tell you that such a keyserver violates the PGP trust model.
Discussion in detail as to why that's so is seriously off-topic, and so I'm
not going to try to defend the point one way or the other; I'm merely
commenting that many PGP users will think it's so, and that's enough for
the purposes of this discussion.
Factor that into your calculations of how much money it's worth it to spend
on this.
