Tinc 2.0

[Guus Sliepen]

On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 08:19:12AM -0600, Rob Townley wrote:

> Maybe I am missing something, but since each host already has a public
> & private key, then why is a 3rd party needed currently?

If the clients exchange their public keys, and have public routable addresses,
then a 3rd party is indeed not needed.

> But it is difficult to replicate the public host file to  each
> machine.  That is why I would welcome a modified myDns or modified
> djbdns that holds the public key for each dynamically updated
> hostname.  Hamachi must use a special DNS server to accomplish this.

Actually the problem is not replicating the host files, it's the lack of
control you'd have if you just did that. I think that the certificate based
authorisation I have in mind will provide that control.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
     Guus Sliepen <guus at tinc-vpn.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://www.tinc-vpn.org/pipermail/tinc/attachments/20090307/4bdb999f/attachment.pgp