On 9/13/2013 8:22 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > And I guess the intention of the RFC is rather clear (with or without > MUSTs)... implementations should not export such signatures... and SKS > counts IMO as an "implementation".
In what bizarro universe is SKS an implementation of RFC4880? It's an implementation of Minsky's efficient synchronization protocol, sure. But not of RFC4880. _______________________________________________ Sks-devel mailing list Sks-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/sks-devel
