On 23/06/2021 06:27, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Andreas Puls dijo [Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 09:32:50PM +0200]:A new domain must be established into the "world". Maybe Kristian wouldtransfer the domain / software to one of us. So we could run it on our
own.
I agree, having a well established name behind helps. Furthermore, sks-keyservers.net is part of countless configuration files. Inheriting the name for a new pool/network would be great to help users from hitting an unexpected breakage.
>
On the other hand, sks-keyservers.net denotes a specific implementation -- One we are trying to migrate away from. So, in case Kristian agrees to transfer the domain, my opinion is that it should be used basically to point at a new name.
Making sks-keyservers.net point to somewhere that still works has merit. I would be cautious about taking it on though, as whoever owns it will inherit Kristian's GDPR problems. You would need to be prepared to respond to RTBF requests in a timely fashion - although this applies to all keyserver operators, the owner of sks-keyservers.net will naturally get the highest number of requests.
So please, if anyone is considering claiming it, don't run SKS on it or you will find yourself unable to comply with GDPR. And I would strongly advise against running a new pool - doing so effectively claims responsibility for other people's servers outside your control.
That said, I think sks-status.gwolf.org is great, and deserves our support. I notice that it is currently failing, perhaps because the URL that you were using as your initial node is no longer available? Feel free to use pgpkeys.eu as the initial node instead.
-- Andrew Gallagher
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
