|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: PEM(?)
-----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-----
|