It all goes back to the light bulb as a great example of
standards setting - back before there was a standard base for
bulbs, I'm sure every light bulb manufacturer had a vested
interest in their pre-standard bases and sockets - whether it
screwed left or right or used push-in pins, the size of the
base, etc.,
You haven't tried to buy light-bulbs in England, have you?
The choice is bayonet mount, or screw mount, then several
size bases, not to mention halogen and spotlight mounts.
If you've traveled much in Europe you will notice similar
confusion with the standard plug shape. They all have the
same size and position of pins but only the Swiss hexagonal
plug will fit in all the sockets. Even the countries with
the same size round socket and plugs managed to place the
ground/earth connections in different places. And let's not
mention the Soviet Union's GOST standard where the pins are
1mm in diameter smaller and 1 mm further apart. That's the
reason for the split pins on many plug adapters because
they have enough flex to work in sockets in Ukraine, Russia,
Kazakhstan etc.
Interoperability of standards is a hard-won prize, whether in
the IETF or elsewhere. The cost of producing documents is
a mere drop in the bucket. In addition, cost is a very slippery
thing to get ahold of because of the difference between
expenses and investments.
--Michael Dillon
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf