<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/24/23 12:56, Adam Thompson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:YT2PR01MB46227A0E337FCD09BC295060ABC99@YT2PR01MB4622.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Why on earth would you set a hard-coded limit? It's not like an additional database table is expensive.</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">While, in general, I understand this
sentiment (real world cardinality is usually: 1, 2, or many), I do
see two counterpoints. Even speaking in general, it is sometimes
useful to define a limit for testing purposes. If you say, "We
support 5", then you are hopefully actually testing 5.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">In this particular situation, I think
the following argument is even more relevant:<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/24/23 14:02, Tim Lyons via
ARIN-consult wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:MN2PR08MB63504E5F20D7E34B4677C6E4CCC99@MN2PR08MB6350.namprd08.prod.outlook.com">In
terms of allowing the registration of multiple hardware security
keys, I suggest allowing a maximum of 3 keys to be registered.
This provides backup options in case a user loses or misplaces
their primary key but encourages users to be cognizant of deleting
old keys that have been lots or become non-functional.</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Richard</pre>
</body>
</html>