by homeworld.cygnus.com with SMTP; 27 Nov 1998 23:14:34 -0000
	by smtp04.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA01839;
	Fri, 27 Nov 1998 16:13:06 -0700 (MST)
 via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpd001817; Fri Nov 27 16:12:58 1998
	by usr02.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA23213;
	Fri, 27 Nov 1998 16:11:35 -0700 (MST)
From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
Message-Id: <199811272311.QAA23213@usr02.primenet.com>
Subject: Re: Merging Net/Free/Open-BSD together against Linux
To: tv@pobox.com (Todd Vierling)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 23:11:35 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, louis@signalpath.on.ca, advocacy@openbsd.org,
        netbsd-advocacy@NetBSD.ORG, FreeBSD-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.4.05.9811271802100.13280-100000@duhnet.net> from "Todd Vierling" at Nov 27, 98 06:04:06 pm
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> : > In my experience in the hardware domain, standards favour widespread
> : > adoption but stifle innovation.
> : 
> : You mean like FTP, SMTP, HTTP, HTMP, and MIME "stifle innovation"?
> : 
> : Or do you mean like ELF, DWARF, NROFF, and SGML "stifle innovation"?
> 
> ``Standards are such wonderful things -- there are so many of them to
> choose from!''

Rather than unattributed quotes of Andrew Tannenbaum, could you be
specific about why you feel that convergence on these particular
standards is a bad thing, and cite alternative standards for each,
with the restriction that there has to be a public reference
implementation available for it to qualify as a standard?

Thanks.

					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.