Re: [Sks-devel] IPv6 peering; keydumps annoyingly large

[Robert J. Hansen]

On Wed, 1 Jun 2011 15:10:01 -0400, Phil Pennock
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Note that we've already lost one valued keyserver operator in Germany

Austria, I think -- not that it matters to your example, but I don't want
to make Austrians feel we're treating them as southern Bavaria.  :)

>> This is exactly what the keyserver network is meant to avoid.  If
>> that's possible, the keyserver system will have failed.
> 
> Hrm, I thought the primary goal was to be a convenient way to get keys.

Depends on your point of view, I imagine.

> I'm happy running a free service to others, providing a reasonably
> complete set of keys; but if you start making assertions about what the
> keyserver network stands for, please point me to the manifesto which I'm
> supposed to have signed up for as a keyserver operator, else kindly
> refrain from speaking for others.

I'll look around for it -- I know that when I first started becoming
active with PGP, back in the early '90s, PGP had a statement of what the
keyservers were intended to do -- "not allowing keys to be deleted, in
order to prevent repressive governments from defeating crypto by inhibiting
key exchange" was one of them.  That's what I'm referring to.

Admittedly, though, you're correct in that it's hardly a holy creed that
we've all sworn to uphold.