Re: Predictable Internet Time

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Tue, 03 January 2017 19:46 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94AF3129B44 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 11:46:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7dGjYyLPke64 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 11:46:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22a.google.com (mail-wm0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC1EF129B3F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 11:46:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id a197so392725324wmd.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 Jan 2017 11:46:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=RKAq91lFcA00cqR6yt8/BQ2USl6X87P45hLpKkMdAhQ=; b=tfPz0B84Ba764NRJKBOQLq+q+xG6gVCFxF4PtulcNUiiRabZzE6WhCb/GtbdtJr2PW YBLmAba9SKPBPPKIDX8B2g1/CEGkIppqUOW8TJODdZODTQb00Q8q5XWw9XcIjw0K5V89 0qYO1sSkT8KnO0ptjpqPWA3nS1riujLZWagUTMd1QrjDKlrbBfX0a+99FYdi7VhssPVl iSM1KHGZK1/iHgfBOQeb+ZBv6BE2KeBk91C7DlDbOsrhByP492K4GnoHny53FINXJXBe XL9cVGlrMoGO4Otf+mctmIlFrr4PxAaEeI4phpPTc4xy9lCfAgpfJCr28/ZcP/SfJa/I 2OvQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RKAq91lFcA00cqR6yt8/BQ2USl6X87P45hLpKkMdAhQ=; b=L87ilqNVCxqVCjnQcqJRbf6M7scbNWl8SmW8f/bpPZ+90mG4GFCWISSskFHxji1AKq XR77iCihSJRqmjEn/b4sZMUR5tDoS0iE/yu6nIEHsKInT/0AcH9q68GcO8M6vIb3hiqG ZBxwLX+a8rx+EPiUEYuGUfa2TnSlmrKzy2mjZ9tZatsvbKG3HmG1j2ia30j0a0UfQesb 7JprmxxJ/hxd1TRyGevpTw/pUduc4Z1tIAoaB8Cz/thzySpxGhGeo9fjNBhBoYm+xq5A ZwCyIxRexxjfniEmAgkd8OiGwYknk9axWT7DYL06/Nry/Fnir8E/X0MaaCJR4CUdg5hd WQHg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIRQxd6AHUHP75rPHyeW5j/pb6eQK1vdfOnZ25M3LEvC17s2ZczTV5nsSQtuk5H3ZiGvK541zqRJ05YDA==
X-Received: by 10.28.211.72 with SMTP id k69mr50866177wmg.137.1483472805407; Tue, 03 Jan 2017 11:46:45 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: hallam@gmail.com
Received: by 10.194.83.101 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 11:46:44 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <9cc49e0a-1aac-67e0-f198-4e0673340394@cisco.com>
References: <CAMm+LwgfQJ8aG5wB=d3fRbbeje3J9o7Z4_DCuP8DL88ouDeKzw@mail.gmail.com> <504e2cea0d1668c31486b05fec0a967a4446aefe@webmail.weijax.net> <CAMm+Lwi_jU6gjdtdM6a2n_9_89tUvWBNXxnMtSjTEA++h1D4Ew@mail.gmail.com> <e0a43370-751f-808c-3719-9716f9cd57d1@isi.edu> <CAMm+Lwg8UzhyqNBrsxNb_8uFLCrL-iqpjPGwfycmvPEOcuE8LA@mail.gmail.com> <9cc49e0a-1aac-67e0-f198-4e0673340394@cisco.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 14:46:44 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: B7XwounRgt1Oty7jqVIXfoA8oLw
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwjSPnimVYmF0WmKT0zNxETt53fxVM+7D+Q2Rmi7nPFsHw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Predictable Internet Time
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1147010699b422054535eddc
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/RBjQha1wa4n2gpOQA296b8oWWUI>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2017 19:46:48 -0000

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>; wrote

> On 1/3/17 7:24 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>
> Umm, my proposal was to ignore the opinion of the ITU in this matter as in
> everything else.
>
>
> That doesn't work in all cases because there are often applications that
> require that the clock time on a device not vary from UTC by some set
> amount.  I think they're fixing for a big UTC leap second shindig in the
> next few years, anyway.
>
> Eliot
>

​My analysis of the politics of the situation is as follows

* The decision makers are the governments, not the ITU

*​ The governments will do whatever their banking and broadcast sectors
tell them.

* The banking and broadcast sections will do whatever Microsoft, Google,
Apple, etc agree on provided that the transition is not going to be more of
a problem than the status quo.

​* If ​there is a non ITU proposal on the table that threatens to replace
ITU as the place where the decision is taken that stands a chance of being
adopted, ITU will prefer to co-opt it rather than lose the appearance of
control.


We already have UT0, UT1 and UT2 and several other variants. The mapping
from UT1 to UTC can be varied by committee.