[Sovereign Keys] A design question: How should timelines and mirrors operate?

[Erik Tews]

Am Mittwoch, den 29.02.2012, 22:02 +0100 schrieb Georg Koppen:
> > I would like to ask an intresting design question: Assuming that all
> > timeline data is signed by the timeline operator, and it is distribute
> > to mirror servers. How should freshness be ensured,
> 
> It is already ensured using the Timeline Freshness Messages. What is the
> problem with these?

If I understand the current design correctly, the TFM doesn't allow a
client to check the correctness of the response instandly. Instead, he
can use this to find out that a mirror was not giving a correct answer
later, or by using cached responses.

If every entry in the timeline would be signed by the timeline server in
regular intervals, a client could check the freshness of the response
directly after each query. Here, the mirror cannot surpress some
entries.

> > and what can do to
> > improve the availability of the timeline?
> 
> I am actually not sure whether this is/should be in the scope of the SK
> spec at all.

One could tweak the design a bit, but it doesn't need to be covered by
the SK specs.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.eff.org/pipermail/sovereign-keys/attachments/20120229/83741c9d/attachment.sig>