Re: [Sks-devel] Well connected?

[Kristian Fiskerstrand]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 09/01/2015 04:42 PM, Andrew Gallagher wrote:
> 
>> On 1 Sep 2015, at 15:24, Kristian Fiskerstrand 
>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 


...

>> 
>> References: [0] 
>> https://sks-keyservers.net/files/2014-09_NUUG.pdf
>> 
> 
> That's great, thanks.
> 
> One thing that does concern me about the current arrangements is 
> how manual (and ad-hoc) the peering system is. I can foresee 
> scalability problems...
> 

How so? What kind of vectors are you aiming to protect against? if a
server drops behind on updates it is dropped from the main pool,
additionally it is fully possible to run stand-alone keyservers that
doesn't synchronize with any other keyserver.

Peering protocol should be manual as there is a level of trust (not
necessarily a very high bar, but one there still) required between the
operators.

- -- 
- ----------------------------
Kristian Fiskerstrand
Blog: http://blog.sumptuouscapital.com
Twitter: @krifisk
- ----------------------------
Public OpenPGP key 0xE3EDFAE3 at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3
- ----------------------------
"Statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is suggestive, but what
they conceal is vital."
(Aaron Levenstein)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJV5cZwAAoJECULev7WN52FDTAH/is3TT92yGH+a9AdRyUDwchs
27N5T21dJZSB3WeLiVzIyRTJAAaomsxVRYP2o5TrUKXCaHDVan4prERe3OL4A+rr
O/2OmDateIvx2ep+hXBgB/qcbFY7dWxFXZio/XH0iYjoELgDiEXuh9qrt7DamOFc
VIc7D2scv6z0ee0/rWZ4AzfaB4XlVnnoykGx31VaKIaNUk661J1voDvz1NUr2zQw
b87iEv53/TBr5lGW+H8kH9ga0RlzRvvpNV/oewW8CjDDd7oFn44ObYFqSYX6dfpo
1N1xQ3RtwkK8Q0pzJAriBSTtrWlpU9loI3mPFaNzqftY8DCYLemy0eHU6KbSFAM=
=m7cy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----