Re: [Sks-devel] Changes to sks-keyservers.net pools

[Phil Pennock]

On 2014-05-06 at 17:53 +0200, Dinko Korunic wrote:
> IMO delisting is fine as long as there is proper communication
> involved and people actually are aware that's going on -- I'm sure
> that not all the SKS administrators read the sks-devel on a
> daily/weekly basis.

For clarity, this becomes: there's a chance that for a window of a
couple of weeks, the only SKS administrators who will be in the
rarely-used "subset" pool will be those who read SKS email daily.

There's a chance that Kristian's main pool will become a set of servers
run only by administrators who check their email at least every 45 days.
This being the pool of keyservers which are the default for a number of
mainstream clients.

I'm really not seeing a problem with this.

The merits of an individual keyserver being run for its own use are
different from the merits of a hostname being used for some pool of
keyservers.  There is plenty of justification for making sure that "the
hostname for the predominant pool used by people who don't change their
keyserver definition from the default" resolves only to servers which
are able to get a security update out within 45 days.

-Phil