Jon Callas wrote: > Yes, but. The existing design and consensus on syslog-sign is that's > a DSA system, and doesn't require a CA. The rationale, as I said > before comes from the days when syslog meant UDP, and size truly > mattered. That may not matter so much today, especially if you're > using TLS as a transport. > > But that's what the existing consensus is. Do we have to, at this > late date, throw out the existing consensus and put in RSA and CAs?
Doesn't *require* a CA, or doesn't *support* CAs? (BTW, to me, RSA vs. DSA seems totally orthogonal to CA vs. no CA issue). Best regards, Pasi _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
