Phil Pennock wrote:
On 2013-09-12 at 19:40 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
While this seems like it is probably a fixable bug for someone who knows
their way around the codebase, I forsee problems with synchronizing the
pool, if some SKS keyservers start following the spec and others remain
On 9/13/2013 5:48 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
RFC 4880 is explicit:
Some implementations do not represent the interest of a single user
(for example, a key server). Such implementations always trim local
certifications from any key they handle.
I don't see a MUST in there. The
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
Someone™ (0x75D292D353ADACCD) made a non-exportable certification on
your user ID John P. Clizbe jpcli...@keyservers.net
(2048R/0x2313315C435BD034). Someone else uploaded that key to a
keyserver (ok, i admit it was me :P). The keyserver network is
currently
On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 18:09 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
Did anyone on this list expect the keyserver network to
propagate non-exportable certifications?
Nah,... not really, IMHO it should be considered a bug, and ideally such
existing signatures should be removed if possible.
And I guess
