[29661] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: PEM(?)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (L. Sassaman)
Sun Jul 2 16:15:33 2000
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2000 13:12:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: "L. Sassaman" <rabbi@quickie.net>
To: J C Lawrence <claw@kanga.nu>
Cc: rmeyer@mhsc.com, nanog@merit.edu,
"'Michael Helm'" <helm@fionn.es.net>, pgp-keyserver-folk@flame.org
In-Reply-To: <25937.962504713@kanga.nu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.QNWS_2.0007020157040.19282-100000@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, J C Lawrence wrote:
> I have watched and read this thread with interest. In the end the
> validity or personal preferences on the various standards is moot.
> Compared to what is needed and wanted by the NANOG membership it
> really just doesn't matter no matter how much you might think that
> PEM/SSL/PGP/whatever are evil/great/flawed/brilliant. You're
> looking to roll out a service and a basic point seems to have been
> lost: actually doing something. Wouldn't it be a bit more useful to
> get the thread onto the questions of:
>
> -- What *functionally* would be most useful to the NANOG
> membership in terms of a networked key server? Do they want
> SSL keys, PGP keys, SSH keys, all of them, some of them, what?
> Ask!
Good point. And so the question is asked...
> -- What resources would be required to implement that and are
> there systems already available that can be leverages to do
> this or is a new development effort required?
This depends on the first answer, of course.
> -- Who will devote resources (machines, bandwidth, admin,
> development time etc)?
I have had numerous companies contact me about machines, bandwidth, and
admin time for the PGP keyserver network, so that is promising.
- --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.
iD8DBQE5X6IwPYrxsgmsCmoRApBJAKDjFPUeADMh7SJo8cFuGwHEEZiicwCfTMu8
+rtSHzqfMJM/CC7OMACs2kU=
=81aT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
