Re: [Ntp] Consensus call: NTPv5 and leap second smearing

On 7/2/2023 7:52 AM, Danny Mayer wrote:
> 
> On 6/28/23 3:55 PM, Dieter Sibold wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> at IETF 116 we decided to have two consensus calls regarding the 
>> content of the NTPv5 requirement draft. These are consensus calls that 
>> we would like to conduct to help progress the NTPv5 requirements 
>> document 
>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv5-requirements/). 
>> Both consensus calls will run until July 21st 2023 and will be 
>> discussed at the next NTP wg meeting at IETF 117 in San Francisco.
>>
>> The second consensus call:
>>
>> Regarding leap second smearing:
>>
>> Currently, the NTPv5 requirement draft states that NTP servers should 
>> not apply leap second smearing to transmitted timestamps. Shall NTPv5 
>> support leap second smearing? If yes, shall the NTP server apply leap 
>> smearing to the transmitted timestamps or otherwise shall the client 
>> perform leap second smearing?
> 
> I don't think that the former is workable since a server that is already 
> smearing only knows about the smeared time.

Huh?  Under what conditions would a server only know about smeared time?

> Since leap seconds are going 
> away and information about smearing should be in an extension field so 
> that a receiving server can decide to reject a smeared packet or one 
> with a different smearing algorithm that it wants to follow.

Having smear in an EF is fine as *additional* information, but there 
must be a way in the base packet to communicate that it is sending 
smeared time.

> Danny
> 
>>
>>
>> Greetings
>> Karen and Dieter
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ntp mailing list
>> ntp@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ntp mailing list
> ntp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp
> 

-- 
Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org>
http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member!