On 6/4/12 4:15 PM, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > Insisting that SKS key servers *never* undertake some reasonable > policies for sound engineering purposes isn't subject to the number > of adamant objectors, but rather to sensible discussion.
There's a difference between saying "these signatures should never be dropped from the servers" (which is my position) and "these signatures should always be presented to clients" (which is not my position). If a client explicitly requests for a sanitized certificate, I see no reason that SKS should not respect that request: but SKS itself needs to keep track of this data. _______________________________________________ Sks-devel mailing list Sks-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/sks-devel
