IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Ntp] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv5-02.txt

Tamme Dittrich <tamme@tweedegolf.com> Mon, 29 July 2024 07:07 UTC

Return-Path: <tamme@tweedegolf.com>
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 4B33EC14F75F for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 00:07:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.908
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=tweedegolf-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com
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 XVZBSgA_Ug1r for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 00:07:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x12b.google.com (mail-lf1-x12b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12b]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F797C14F5F9 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 00:07:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-52f04b3cb33so6945303e87.0 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 00:07:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tweedegolf-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1722236826; x=1722841626; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=vDIVcUWln3xsGo+S+pWIv/bcz0+fI2glNCW1HLPS5QE=; b=pd3cU7I/VI0L9gRfA0ZYReirzzhmAI6j0hKUFAB0NYxVvJvZ+SjKw79pFGIYgHOelv BWJ2IkuhSwqoy81OXv1WKOUEFTHKL8StBMc6VS3/zUMHVsYVdzc1InGJooicIulpzVnu HPtixUi0kt9y5IsbB0d33fwW/qWpw+sQy3j7owx5T3YZXjAZiF8HHhDNQjGCr6C6zfqu a401QhT6WhF3dKc1z7WjdrmtHLpCV4U8Ft8IdiChCMGm0c/VXFskgvWVEws7J3JB7xYG +wT6jdDmHEJtM589O/IA6eyhY1Z15NX5FCRfQyses+eoGvaQGJXAyeoLhO6ktGnuBkOE 1QOQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1722236826; x=1722841626; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=vDIVcUWln3xsGo+S+pWIv/bcz0+fI2glNCW1HLPS5QE=; b=GSqZz5DQrPkrWiPTph4QIgtdEkrK7Ni5R6zDpaUG6HP6oqF/gfJGql7ELXyOYAxa9d VGIhWuN3Hk4fULVdW9WHn/MJW/+3ptL1RzCA62WsSo6YfcLRTAeDLoyc/gcW9zRxE5W9 f1g16t6Lln71ZFmuINHQWVRNM7qpS6BKOPfQ9vI3PWj992C5IxqlkdRf66u1GwUnV0Fb DpEjpo2RDCqYNQpDcKaOl6sp/B/1LkopcN6VlPDNhwIE044oSNianUrGg5yhdBU/3XSP GN7Cu99pY6T4enQ67KTC6CrLt67mUI1TQ7Olumdd4+BDdiuUNcC0vNiF7iHU81hrd6gR 2weQ==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUYrUoUVJAAoVyGZc9Npk8UScm5DsvhHfTe0kSAjeK8sEa38ApjQHy+vzOxyOjO3woAyH9Pr0RDPHatBUQ=
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz61seXTIb4qTgREhlsaO+C233F+kvbAEQfvsfvTnHA0+5A1ou2 WNMKOaia7EbQGpO77MIFLuxlgVNQX7l57CjEtqsO8Vx28jCiyT87PZnnzggjS86bFCZbQOSm/Hu egVmoPmnwtQD58oNMONVfA2lft74s1VyCShBLlQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGodDZIDtlsouLcRfILQOIfMXa6GNRkX1RTtP0vXZXq0e6EA0NQeMrW3aRNBjb8cCW6EM0IQURLB4jsn5btlf0=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:2ef:b0:52e:9808:3f48 with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5309b27d45amr4926378e87.21.1722236825762; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 00:07:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <171880149775.17275.17603202157290281888@ietfa.amsl.com> <AM7PR02MB576576740392B0B63189B4EFCFD42@AM7PR02MB5765.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com> <CAKtkH6yn4X1Eo8Mh1LY0zC9doX_Yxh8Aw=7iPHDxg1p=K0dERA@mail.gmail.com> <Zqc6mPZDkKigsyLS@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <Zqc6mPZDkKigsyLS@localhost>
From: Tamme Dittrich <tamme@tweedegolf.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 09:06:53 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKvtgU3asMN-kTOm=dGBFQgg5ZEsO=ui+DLnK+CakBKkade46Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000381398061e5d82e3"
Message-ID-Hash: FTRXIJPYQ2CRUF6UZFEQAA4YYV22S36M
X-Message-ID-Hash: FTRXIJPYQ2CRUF6UZFEQAA4YYV22S36M
X-MailFrom: tamme@tweedegolf.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-ntp.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Dieter Sibold <dsibold.ietf@gmail.com>, Doug Arnold <doug.arnold=40meinberg-usa.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [Ntp] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv5-02.txt
List-Id: Network Time Protocol <ntp.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/2uU6c0o0e05n6IR8PzyTc_kfeT4>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ntp-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ntp-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ntp-leave@ietf.org>

Hey,

in my opinion swapping the meanings is the cleaner solution. It also makes
it easier for new implementations to get it correct.

I also would not mind implementing it, since parsing the NTPv5 header is
already quite different to the NTPv4 header.

-Tamme

On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 8:46 AM Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 09:15:56PM +0200, Dieter Sibold wrote:
> > I'm wondering why the information about the unknown leap is transmitted
> by
> > the field Flags and not bei the field LI? Would it not make sense that
> all
> > leap seconds related information is transmitted by the Leap Indicator
> field
> > LI? Could the meaning of LI=3 and Flag=1 be swapped? Or are there
> technical
> > reasons against this?
>
> Good question.
>
> I agree it would be cleaner to have those meanings swapped. The
> question is if it's worth the potential confusion and additional
> complexity in implementations that want to support both NTPv4 and
> NTPv5. I think I'd not mind that.
>
> Any other opinions?
>
> --
> Miroslav Lichvar
>
> _______________________________________________
> ntp mailing list -- ntp@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to ntp-leave@ietf.org
>

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status