Exactly - and by using registries we should be able to avoid this in most cases anyway. Process goes like this:
- Extensible spec released, implementors have at it
- MacroHard wants to talk about RAID levels for their upcoming BigDisk™
- It's not in the spec so they complain to the registry maintainer (us?)
- We think it's a good idea (or not) and add it to the appropriate registry (or not)
- JuniperBerry see MacroHard's BigDisk™ eating their lunch and want to add a similar feature to their LittleDisk™
- It's already in the registry so nothing needs to be done - bingo, interoperability
This doesn't work for complicated requirements, but for that we have the good work being done by other SSOs like DMTF - we can continue to focus on what interests us and users can do everything they need without breaking out into multiple protocols.
Sam