[Ntp] RFC 8877 on Guidelines for Defining Packet Timestamps
rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Wed, 23 September 2020 18:39 UTC
Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
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 2D3FB3A13F0; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 11:39:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 FwQBdf2LvBb1; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 11:39:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F6613A13F4; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 11:39:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id E6C72F40776; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 11:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1005:ams_util_lib.php
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, drafts-update-ref@iana.org, ntp@ietf.org
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20200923183903.E6C72F40776@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 11:39:03 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/Kn5-bRk_mjY3cc4mZJ73Z3c5S80>
Subject: [Ntp] RFC 8877 on Guidelines for Defining Packet Timestamps
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <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: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 18:39:25 -0000
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 8877
Title: Guidelines for Defining Packet Timestamps
Author: T. Mizrahi,
J. Fabini,
A. Morton
Status: Informational
Stream: IETF
Date: September 2020
Mailbox: tal.mizrahi.phd@gmail.com,
joachim.fabini@tuwien.ac.at,
acmorton@att.com
Pages: 17
Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None
I-D Tag: draft-ietf-ntp-packet-timestamps-09.txt
URL: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8877
DOI: 10.17487/RFC8877
Various network protocols make use of binary-encoded timestamps that
are incorporated in the protocol packet format, referred to as
"packet timestamps" for short. This document specifies guidelines for
defining packet timestamp formats in networking protocols at various
layers. It also presents three recommended timestamp formats. The
target audience of this document includes network protocol designers.
It is expected that a new network protocol that requires a packet
timestamp will, in most cases, use one of the recommended timestamp
formats. If none of the recommended formats fits the protocol
requirements, the new protocol specification should specify the
format of the packet timestamp according to the guidelines in this
document.
This document is a product of the Network Time Protocol Working Group of the IETF.
INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community.
It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
this memo is unlimited.
This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
https://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-dist
For searching the RFC series, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/search
For downloading RFCs, see https://www.rfc-editor.org/retrieve/bulk
Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org. Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.
The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC