RE: lastVerified: optional vs. extension

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

Sorry, I missed a few points:

< The objects themselves are not extensible, you either 
< have to live with them or you have to replace them.

Not true.  Each of the domain, contact, and host objects can be extended.
For example, I have multiple individual submission Internet-Draft documents
published that extend the domain object.

It's true that you can't _remove_ required elements from the objects, but
definition of required elements if why we have a consensus-based process in
the first place.

> Error codes are not extensible, with the 
> consequence that some existing registries put additional 
> error codes in the free 
> text elements (which are not thought to be parsed).

Again, not true.  Additional errors and error codes can be defined using the
extension mechanism.  If implementers are putting additional error codes in
inappropriate free text elements they're extending the protocol improperly.

-Scott-