[Ntp] My current thoughts / NTS4PTP status
martin.langer@ptb.de Thu, 25 January 2024 13:55 UTC
Return-Path: <martin.langer@ptb.de>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BB36C14CEFD for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 05:55:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.628
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.628 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_MIME_NO_HTML_TAG=0.377, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ptb.de
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VMb5wkPSzdsA for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 05:55:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx1.bs.ptb.de (mx1.bs.ptb.de [192.53.103.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33413C14F5FF for <ntp@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Jan 2024 05:55:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from s23397.bs.ptb.de ([172.21.101.132]) by mx1.bs.ptb.de with ESMTP id 40PDtJlC031751-40PDtJlE031751 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 25 Jan 2024 14:55:19 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sensitivity:
In-Reply-To:
References:
From: martin.langer@ptb.de
To: ntp@ietf.org
Cc: Dieter.Sibold@ptb.de, mlichvar@redhat.com
Message-ID: <OF3F043201.CF8CBB9A-ONC1258AAF.004C79AA-C1258AAF.004C79AB@ptb.de>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 14:55:18 +0100
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-FEAS-Client-IP: 172.21.101.132
X-FE-Policy-ID: 5:5:5:SYSTEM
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; d=ptb.de; s=s1-ptbde; c=relaxed/relaxed; h=mime-version:references:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:date:content-type; bh=AXj+VN4oBV4RCUUaDb6m56/3jXc/4uGW2aan/HGrg2o=; b=bphTpmugZ4XGwpSwDr0pZJ1rc2yWumsP1pi5XSbBPUNDZymkG1qsTNjEM4WGYGrCLCdR1797U4v5 nvI8qtKNBMLGwpGu0ZmNDmYbgWea3W4TqCG3Rva7Hetf8gtWFGoCc1zh1pbiSO2nsN7Uc0UDwqqZ SZMQsZFwds830js/9yWaVvfanriEHjX/vGfZVZat2mSlJG+I9sI3By5T6NqhQs7wa6EzKFDwgVu7 0ppdTVdOVZ37mykzfW/QlX5FTA5n3zhh7bMlxIN77vlp2scRKnR8UtGvU4EeLk/5UIIyozIP/eOL JxUAlbTosbBn6ZTk2Qk7BX9AZTz5apkpdd3TYg==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/-AFB1DZUTMHUzEC7ocBAoIUxVz8>
Subject: [Ntp] My current thoughts / NTS4PTP status
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Time Protocol <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 13:55:27 -0000
Since there is a possibility that I will not make it to the
meeting on time today, I would like to share my thoughts here.
1. NTP over PTP
--------------------------
@Miroslav: Thanks for adding the requested content.
I have one small comment: In chapter 2 (PTP transport for NTP)
it would be worth mentioning that the values (e.g. lengthField)
are in network byte order.
However, this is optional, as it should be in the IEEE 1588 standard.
From my point of view the draft is ready and I give my ok for it :)
2. NTS for PTP
--------------------------
The implementation is making progress and I plan to integrate and
test NTS4PTP in LinuxPTP in early March. The draft will be updated
accordingly and in 2-3 weeks there will be a draft update. After
that I would like to migrate NTS4PTP as an IETF working group draft
document (draft-ietf-nts-for-ptp-00).
What do you think about this?
3. Roughtime and NTPv5 requirements
-------------------------------------------
I haven't had much time in the last days to read the latest
mailinglist discussions. So I can't give any further feedback
at the moment.
Best regards,
Martin
__________________________________________
Dr.-Ing. Martin Langer
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB)
Working Group 4.42 "Dissemination of Time"
Bundesallee 100,
38116 Braunschweig (Germany)
Tel.: +49 531 592-4470
E-Mail: martin.langer@ptb.de
- [Ntp] My current thoughts / NTS4PTP status martin.langer
- Re: [Ntp] My current thoughts / NTS4PTP status Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] My current thoughts / NTS4PTP status martin.langer