Re: [Ntp] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-ntp-interleaved-modes-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com> Tue, 20 July 2021 11:08 UTC

Return-Path: <mlichvar@redhat.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 D5A3E3A1D7E for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 04:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.55
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.452, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.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 ONZmQ87f4EDH for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 04:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) (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 900573A1D83 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 04:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1626779300; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=rmn4MBWMKb60kVy726+SRvFdjhhJUNNw1sS/iwCm2hI=; b=IHpV9GCRlIHEAduVxL/2ohnXISKcYXbJMST+9dm+kEGO1I8LndrItsdAZexccSMSCbNjQB +/O2/kaxYKRnVc6yHvpAaZaML/BZLp5KXt4aL5EliNHzgZCvZAi9Wt+iVbMGvL3KwADvla vH7Q72zC9q3Df9WX1TgzcSewynL6FT4=
Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-341-1MKgARKfNXiS4Wbfi59ETw-1; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 07:08:19 -0400
X-MC-Unique: 1MKgARKfNXiS4Wbfi59ETw-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E53E1084F40 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 11:08:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (holly.tpb.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com [10.43.134.11]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD34919C44 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Jul 2021 11:08:15 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 13:08:14 +0200
From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
To: ntp@ietf.org
Message-ID: <YPaunrczI/inrtMP@localhost>
References: <YNw9fHMijDFIW9B4@localhost> <YNrbjCDF4/609dg/@localhost> <D999D237-5A25-4E84-99D0-EE5DB2B13411@cisco.com> <YN3ZzPN5LOsAjmz6@localhost> <DM4PR11MB5438D8450E7B90D363929640B5119@DM4PR11MB5438.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <DM4PR11MB5438D8450E7B90D363929640B5119@DM4PR11MB5438.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23
Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=mlichvar@redhat.com
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/5QDDWf4D7dsgtxR3vRmgmInASHw>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Robert Wilton's Discuss on draft-ietf-ntp-interleaved-modes-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 11:08:29 -0000

On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 09:39:47AM +0000, Rob Wilton (rwilton) wrote:
> Hence, I propose three possible alternatives:
> 
> (1) Change this document to somehow make use of NTPs extension mechanism and continue down the path of publishing as a proposed standard.  This, I think, would probably entail taking the document back to the WG.
> 
> (2) Change the document status to Informational rather than Standards Track, modifying the text to focus on documenting how some implementations work rather than as an endorsement from IETF that this is the right way to modify the NTP protocol.

I'd prefer the second choice. Would anyone from the WG oppose that?

> (3) Alternatively, if the authors/WG believe that publishing that document as proposed standard is definitely the right choice, then I would be willing to change my ballot position to abstain.  I.e., I don't agree with what is being done here, but neither will I block progression of the document, given that you say that this modification does not cause operational issues in practice.

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar