Handling of bad cash
nisse at lysator.liu.se
07 Oct 2004 12:48:04 +0200
Linus Nordberg <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> email@example.com (Niels Möller) wrote
> 06 Oct 2004 17:35:43 +0200:
> | What do you think about a RL (real-life) meeting soon? I think we have
> I think that would be good. Is Stockholm fine with you? I'm afraid
> it can't happen very soon, Stockholm or not.
> Earliest opportunity for me would be daytime next wednesday
> (2004-10-13). Earliest non-daytime would be 18th, 19th or 20th of
> October. :(
2004-10-13 works fine for me, I'd suggest at 14:00. Location? We could
meet at KTH, using my department's library or so. (I think our meeting
place must have a working whiteboard or blackboard).
> Have you had any luck finding someone with a bit more knowledge about
> I guess we'll have to include relaying here as well.
Right, forwarding is a special case of relaying.
> | * if keys should be per user or per mta.
> What are the arguments against per user keys?
Per-user keys implies a much larger database. The keys aren't owned by
the users anyway, and are of quite limited usefulness for user
authentication. Some things, like the handling of mailing lists that
use multiple addresses, are simplified when keys are assoicated with
mta:s rather than with addresses. One may still associate some
per-user information with the keys. I haven't made up my mind yet, but
simplicity is important.