Maybe there is a "wye" in the short term, but unless there are patent issues or similar, the new Märklin protocols will be open in the end , with or without Märklin releasing it. There will sooner or later be someone who does reverse engineering if the protocols aren't released. However, for that to happen, we need to to have access to the equipment. Therefore, the competition will have the choice of waiting until the reverse engineering can be done, or develop parallel matching features. In the end, I think Uhlenbrock etc. will have systems that support both the Märklin protocols as well as DCC with possible extensions.

A lot of years ago, the protocol was more or less "built into" the control units etc. Nowadays, the protocols is mainly SW that can be supplied as an upgrade. The HW just needs to support some communication standards. In the Märklin System case, these HW standards are:

- "digital power" de-facto standard for outgoing commands (to the locos etc.). This means signalling by alternating the polarity of the track voltage between +20V and -20V. Nothing new here except for the data coding. E.g. Selectrix and new feed back mode of DCC have added a third state, "power off", but it seems like Märklin System is not using this.

- RDS 57kHz carrier system for for return communication from the locos.

- CAN bus for communication between control units and mobile stations.

- Ethernet (10 Mbit) for communication with computers.

- The "s88" bus for feed back from sensors etc.(?). At least, Märklin states that the s88 can still be used without exceptions ("unbedingt").

It is interesting to see that Märklin are HW-wise going for industry standard or de de-facto standard protocols instead of inventing something by their own. I do not think Märklin will try to keep the SW protocols secret for ever. Probably they just try to create a time window where they can establish themselves as a "leader" in some sense. A number of advanced users, like some of us here in the forum, will consider the Märklin System too "close" and look for other solutions, but the bulk of the customers don't care if it's closed because they wouldn't use the advantages of the openness anyway.

David,
the point is not if Märklin takes interest in other manufacturers.
The real point , I think, is if Märklin will take interest in their customers. And because there are customers who want to use other control programs than the one that Märklin supplies, they should be transparent about the protocols.
I personally would never buy a system when the manufacturer keeps the technical details secret.

I agree with both Nico and Perz to some extent but as long as I enjoy the three rail system Then I will support Marklin as they can supply all I need. Lenz and the IB systems etc can only give me a control but no track or coaches etc. Marklin has a huge investment in a very large range over three different gauges and is a long standing Company. The others as mentioned above make good products but without three rail track who would buy an IB. Lenz are slightly different in that they now do some locos and for a while supplied Roco with their digital system.
Somehow I just cant see Mercedes giving BMW their latest new model design.
I have no objection to anyone who helps our hobby by producing model rail equipment but they cannot expect to receive free research from a bigger Company.
regards to all
David (off to play with his trains)

Davy, in that case, let's hope to learn something from ESU in the future. They gave away one thing already: the protocol is bi-phase-mark, and a little googling learns what this means. Let's wait for the next hint....