> On 1 Sep 2015, at 15:24, Kristian Fiskerstrand > <kristian.fiskerstr...@sumptuouscapital.com> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > >> On 09/01/2015 04:19 PM, Andrew Gallagher wrote: >> Has anyone performed a survey of sks servers to see how well >> connected we are? How fragile is the network under failure >> conditions? Do we rely too much on a small number of links? > > If you have a good eye-sight (or a zoom button), you see one such > graphical display e.g. on [0] that is generated > based on .dot files I produce out of the network mesh recorded. > > Although I look at them manually from time to time, no proper > statistical analysis or review has been performed on this information. > > 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... A _______________________________________________ Sks-devel mailing list Sks-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/sks-devel
