Re: 64bit time_t

John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> Sun, 22 June 2008 01:25 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75F9C3A67C0; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 18:25:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7DCE3A67C0 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 18:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qur4gsImEk6g for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 18:25:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [208.31.42.53]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 921963A679F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Jun 2008 18:25:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 53608 invoked from network); 22 Jun 2008 01:20:29 -0000
Received: from simone.iecc.com (208.31.42.47) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 22 Jun 2008 01:20:29 -0000
Date: 22 Jun 2008 01:25:23 -0000
Message-ID: <20080622012523.43515.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: 64bit time_t
In-Reply-To: <BLU120-W240BCEF0CF3ACCC84DFBF3CAA40@phx.gbl>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

>Make time_t 64 bits wide. ...

>What do you think?

The basic definition of time_t is in the ANSI/ISO C standards, which
say it's an arithmetic type but leave the details to the
implementation.  POSIX further defines it to be an integer number of
seconds since the 1970 epoch, with the implementation deciding how big
an integer it should be.

We all know that signed 32 bit versions of time_t will overflow in
2038, so modern POSIX systems are moving toward 64 bit versions.

If you want to update or change the definition of time_t, you need to
talk to WG14 which maintains the C standard, or PASC which maintains
the POSIX standards.  Neither of these groups is related to the IETF.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor
"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf