On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 01:45:45PM -0500, Brandon wrote: > This is way complicated and with no apparent good reason. I'm suggesting a > much simpler restructuring in which most of the old keys still work > (everything but MSKs).
Because I like elegent systems - I know you don't share that. But I do realise that the rambling system does cost a *lot* for being so flexable. Very possibly too much. > Old keys: > KSK at string > CHK at dockey,enckey > SSK at pubkey[,privkey]/string > MSK at key//[string] > > New keys: > KSK at string[//docname] > CHK at dockey,enckey[//docname] > SSK at pubkey[,privkey][,baseline,increment]/string[//docname] I think you'll find that's effectivly one of my systems with "%DBR" removed from one key ;) > I see no reason to complicate things at this point when a simpler system > does everything that we need. Right - if people don't want to rethink metadata and like the current system that's fine. I might even be one of their number. The above it simply what's on the table with the current system - nothing new. AGL -- I never let my schooling get in the way of my education. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 240 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20010405/9b3e9949/attachment.pgp>
