[29652] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: PGP kerserver infrastructure
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (L. Sassaman)
Sat Jul 1 17:46:22 2000
Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2000 14:43:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: "L. Sassaman" <rabbi@quickie.net>
To: Bennett Todd <bet@rahul.net>
Cc: "Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>, nanog@merit.edu,
pgp-keyserver-folk@flame.org
In-Reply-To: <20000701145052.G2607@oven.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.QNWS_2.0007011442100.16389-100000@thetis.deor.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 1 Jul 2000, Bennett Todd wrote:
> The real difference between the two is that S/MIME is based on the
> model of creating and subsidizing an artificial monopoly for the
> CAs, while PGP is not. Unless you're a CA, it's an easy choice:-).
And to expound upon this a little, CAs have artificially set PGP up as a
competitor to their existance. CAs could easily embrace PGP and offer PGP
services along with S/MIME and TLS. They choose not to, since PGP makes
CAs optional (not obsolute, however).
- --Len.
__
L. Sassaman
System Administrator |
Technology Consultant | "Common sense is wrong."
icq.. 10735603 |
pgp.. finger://ns.quickie.net/rabbi | --Practical C Programming
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: OpenPGP Encrypted Email Preferred.
iD8DBQE5XmYePYrxsgmsCmoRAp6XAKDxrD/7+PtsJ5Rl052e950ANzsJSQCfSdDd
MlOz4dvqcSfG/BUtyjdbHMg=
=5Oy7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
