On Mon, 13 Dec 1999 23:47:22 +0000, James Redfern
>What you wrote was "The idea being to thrash out these mechanisms". I still
>don't see why the open forum of a relevant NG here is not more beneficial than a
>few people over there.
Well I'm being very *practical*, having done lots of system work I
know that the only real way is to test, then discuss. Test again.
*yawn*. I've already discovered issues in starting up the list that I
would not have discovered through NG *discussion* alone.
I'm quite happy to post summaries of issues here, from time to time,
if others are interested in what has been learned.
Quote:>I guess what was at the back of my mind was that even here, because of the range
>of views (sometimes diametrically opposed), it's damn difficult to figure out if
>anything approaching a consensus on the right way to do a thing/anything is ever
Well everyone's entitled to their own opinion / approach. And I don't
profess to being a expert in cryptology. All I am attempting to do is
practically thrash out the issues of running a list, because I have
some real applications for it in mind.
Practical issues such as:
* test which email platforms support PGP well
* test for any key format issues
* anonymity issues, testing these on a list
* practical limits on manually running a list
Quote:>Taking it to a smaller venue might help in that, but then it starves many of the
>answer, if achieved. Get my drift?
Well again, my focus is the practical application, what works, what
doesn't etc. I don't mind feeding back to the list. What could be
beneficial here in the NG is discussing alternative key models than
that presented in PGP itself (which is my starting point). Or key
models that are easier to manage long-term (if that is possible).
Bear in mind my list criteria:
* no programming of system/mail software to run the list
* list distribution performed at remote address
* msgs cannot be individually replicated/encrypted
James - PGP Encryption/Signing Supported