Re: Predictable Internet Time

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Joe Touch <[e-mail]> wrote:

> +1
>
> You can deny the ITU all you want, but we are not in control of the time
> standards used by financial, governmental, etc. systems.
>

​Neither is the ITU. The governments, financial services etc are.

An ITU standard that predictably causes confusion and chaos every year is
ripe for replacement.​



> Note that everything below also assumes a consistent view of time
> itself; conversion from "seconds since epoch measured locally" always
> needs to be translated to UTC at sea level on Earth anyway.
>
> Time within the machine should be measured relative to its own temporal
> frame, but whenever we communicate with another machine we need to
> strive to be as close to UTC as possible - warts and all. Anything else
> - including and especially smearing - compromises *correct* behavior.


​So you are for sticking with IPv4 as well?

Nothing can ever change because the ITU is in charge...​

​People are only in charge as long as other people let them. ​





>
> Joe
>
>
> On 1/2/2017 10:29 PM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
> > I think personally, as long as we do have leap seconds:
> >
> > - we should have the leap second information available somewhere in
> clear machine readable format. Some suggestions exists, including encoding
> it in A-records in DNS ;-)
> >
> > - we should look at having the time since epoch really be the number of
> SI-seconds since the epoch
> >
> > - we should have translation between number of seconds and UTC take leap
> seconds into account
> >
> > - we should fix the code that do not accept 61 seconds in a minute
>
>