RE: lastVerified: optional vs. extension

["Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>]

> you do know that the world's largest ccTLD (.de) has a 
> different model currently 
> and that it works fine. But you chose to ignore it. We had 
> long discussions 
> about the sense and nonsense of the association between name 
> servers and the 
> domains they belong to. But finally you chose to ignore my 
> points completely. 
> You designed it your way, with the result that it is still 
> being discussed heavily.

Yes, thanks to you I have an understanding of what .de is doing and how it
works.  You're quite incorrect, though, to claim that I or anyone else
ignored the .de model or your points.  I (and several others) _disagreed_
with your points.  That doesn't mean your position was ignored, and it's an
assault on reality to claim otherwise.

Don't forget that my last proposal for addressing out-of-zone hosts (which
tilted towards the .de model, by the way) has also not been incorporated
into the documents.  That example, and the reality of how your comments were
addressed, is a measure of how the consensus process works.  I'm not about
to suggest that my inputs on the issue were ignored just because the WG
didn't go along with them, though.

-Scott-