I want to loudly call attention to a big problem that occurs when one is
too much determined to compromise in the face of simple intransigence.
That problem is that the compromise is in fact not a solution at all.
Case ONE: ISO/CCITT "compromised" on the network layer question, and
adopted what is now the GREAT CONS/CLNS mess, where ISO has two (not
one) network layer choice, and a lot of non-interworking in its midst.
Lets not do the moral equivalence of this ISO/CCITT "non-solution".
Case TWO: CMOT, which is the IAB/IETF equivalent of the ISO/CCITT
"solution" where-in two protocol sets were commissioned (SNMP and CMOT).
If IETF and IAB try to do that again (as an "8bit smtp solution", you
can be sure there is going to be a lot of real screaming going on.
I believe in compromise, where there is a rational and workable option,
but not where the decision is a simple mess.
Best...\Stef