Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!decwrl!ucbvax!ISI-BRADEN.ARPA!braden
From: braden@ISI-BRADEN.ARPA.UUCP
Newsgroups: mod.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Port Collisions
Message-ID: <8605141747.AA04242@isi-braden.arpa>
Date: Wed, 14-May-86 13:47:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: isi-brad.8605141747.AA04242
Posted: Wed May 14 13:47:27 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 16-May-86 01:42:49 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 17
Approved: tcp-ip@sri-nic.arpa

It sounds like another version of the SNA/DECNET free-enterprise protocol
wars.

Do you think we should encourage the proliferation of private protocols,
many of them doing the same things?  It is clearly in the national 
interest (that's us, friends) to promote maximal interconnection of
heterogeneous systems.  That is what standards are for.

Until recently, in England there were several different standards for
electric plugs, because each of the 19th century power barons designed
their own.  So you bought an appliance with a cord but no plug on the
end, and added the plug necessary for your outlet. Rather like a
configuration file, isn't it?

As a customer, do you think I should buy a software system from a vendor
that did not have the resources to properly document its internal function?
I wonder what kind of maintenance and support I will get with that product.