System design interview: when to mention specific technologies vs staying abstract?

There's conflicting advice out there about whether to mention specific technologies (e.g., 'use Kafka') or to stay more abstract (e.g., 'use a distributed message queue') during a system design interview. On one hand, naming specific tech shows knowledge and experience. On the other hand, it can derail the conversation into a debate about the pros and cons of that specific tech, which might not be the interviewer's focus. My current approach is to generally stay abstract initially, describing the *type* of component needed. Then, if the interviewer probes or I feel it's relevant, I might say, 'For this, I'd consider something like Kafka for its high throughput and durability, but RabbitMQ could also work for simpler use cases.' The goal is to show I know *how* to select a technology, not just *that* I know it exists. What's the common wisdom here? Is there a good balance to strike between showing specific tech knowledge and keeping the design flexible and abstract enough to demonstrate broader architectural thinking?