RE: [ga] Re: We must move the DNSO server out of France.(was: Proof ofIdentification)

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

> To repeat what Kent and I have both tried to say....
>
>     * From both a technological and legal standpoint,
>     authentication and encrytion are different.

Wrong on both counts and Kent knows better. The only difference is what you
encrypt.

>     * Nothing suggested so far on the DNSO lists requres
>     encryption, nor should such suggestions be necessary.
>     Encyption is the enemy of "open and transparent"

Pray tell, how you would validate an authentication with out encryption
technology? Your last sentence is only an opinion and is unsupportable.

>     * While regulations about encryption vary, and will probably
>     continue to evolve, no country bans strong authentication
>     techniques.

France, China, (soon, the UK?) etc.

> Now, there must be some part of "no restriction on
> authentication" that is hard to understand, but, if so, would
> someone explain to us what it is.

The amount of encryption allowed for authentication makes this a moot
difference. The authentication allowed in France is ineffectual. It might as
well be plain-text. There is indeed restrictions, on authentication, in
France, still.

I could hide all sorts of messages in a "public key".

> Otherwise, can we return this particular red herring to the pond?

Sorry, it's learned how to breath air.