On 04/28/2010 06:29 PM, Jesus Cea wrote: > This is not good. An undocumented *key* feature, written in a obscure > programming language :). > > I know it is not very appropiate to post this in this mailing list but... > > I was wondering if there is any kind of demand of an alternative OpenPGP > keyserver, with a different but documented syncronization technology, > like Merkle trees. Implemented in Python.
There are already several alternative OpenPGP keyservers with different (but documented) synchronization tech. In particular, all the systems that sync'ed via e-mail (onak, pks, openpksd, etc. i'm sure someone else has a better list than me). They have been superseded by SKS, mainly because of the more effective synchronization. The algorithm *is* documented, but it's academic/mathematical documentation, not bits-on-the-wire documentation. See the two papers linked from the site here: http://minskyprimus.net/sks/ I don't think a new synchronization technique is what we need; i *do* think that an alternate implementation that interoperates with sks would be a great thing, and i imagine would be a good way to really nail down what's happening practically in the actual set reconciliation. > I apology for the off-topic and the attack to sks :(. I don't think it's an attack, or certainly not an off-base attack -- it's an acknowledgment of a real weakness, and SKS would itself be better if it was resolved. Thanks for bringing it up. --dkg PS i don't read/write ocaml either, and i don't have the available cycles to write such an alternate implementation myself. I'm just saying that i think it's a good idea.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Sks-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/sks-devel
