Re: lastVerified: optional vs. extension

[Edward Lewis <edlewis@arin.net>]

Here's my metric:

Make it optional if
1) Everyone that will want to use it will do so in the same way and 
can agree on the syntax.
2) Everyone will want to be able to make use of it at some point - 
even if not regularly.
3) It's worth making a change to the core documents for this.

Make it an extension if
1) Not everyone agrees on what is should look like or how it should be used.
2) Not everyone will want the ability to make use of it.
Note that there is no #3 (would have been - it can be an extension 
after the core specs are at PS).  I won't say this because I refuse 
to consider extensions to a protocol that hasn't hit PS yet.

Everyone means 'all users of EPP clients, all users of EPP servers.' 
Implementer's opinions don't count here - except to argue over my 
choice of metrics.  Implementer's can report what they hear users 
saying.

The question isn't the goodness nor evilness of last-verified.  It's 
whether it is vital to the protocol.

PS - I refuse to poll the list.  That's voting and I won't stand for it.
PPS - I don't have a preference, I'm a chair.
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                          +1-703-227-9854
ARIN Research Engineer