On Feb 20, 2026, at 09:38, Paul Wouters <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Feb 2026, Paul Hoffman wrote: > >> A strong +1 for what Wes says. >> >> Said another way: I'm against WG adoption of this draft if it is only about >> HSMs or primarily focused on them, but in favor it if covers the typical use >> cases for DNSSEC signers. As others have said, "how to deal with HSM private >> key loss" is a blog post (that should talk about specific HSMs), not a >> long-lived RFC. > > Isn't the software use case "always have recent backups" ? Is that worthy of > a draft?
Your use of the word "have" would be unhelpful for probably 90% of the readers. (Also: you have already stated your opinion on the call for adoption; please allow others to do so without attack.) --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
