> Interoperability shouldn’t be an issue – that’s what a standardized protocol is for. It's definitely an issue with many cases. Unfortunately people make mist

> Interoperability shouldn’t be an issue – that’s what a standardized protocol is for. It's definitely an issue with many cases. Unfortunately people make mistakes in implementation and standards have ambiguities, so a common case is doing a lot of interop experiments and code tweaks, and your position is going to be weak if you're not a big player: Others won't test their changes against you and their changes may break your interop. Depends a lot on the complexity and maturity of the protocol of course, cost/convenience of interop testing, whether there's a de-facto standard/dominant implementation to be bug compatible with, and whether you need (m)any-to-(m)any interop or not. Something like Bluetooth is going to be the worst case because it's physical devices, can't test it remotely and you need many-to-many interop testing and there are a zillion implementors with varying levels of competency... and something like SMB is going to be easy because everyone talks to 1-2 server implementations and they're just software. Zeroconf might be somewhere in between.