Re: [Ntp] comments on draft-mlichvar-ntp-ntpv5-03 / Message Format

Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com> Mon, 29 November 2021 10:05 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 CEE3C3A101D for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 02:05:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.701, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=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 Ox91aY8yJLD8 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 02:05:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (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 86EDE3A05A4 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 02:05:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1638180335; 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=LvdseEFFXc0jqmFTiGKtiU+/9JIX3lWfEx1+ygy8QMc=; b=cxy8DHkj6AWdQT+KOjz3aJO5KhV6RPcSyBqu0Muc4/+HPgyoVxOBT3GoYRRs3vCzIcrsLq t+WHw//eR87qezTd4Lva6nI1oWFiy40UpdqUmxjTpujH9nut76ZC65JvtUMCqbqpibmrN/ jbXSwur19TmXQn9a8KfTKzhLr2JVsFQ=
Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-77-CATB1D8UOImyYf9IAdm7Dw-1; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 05:05:32 -0500
X-MC-Unique: CATB1D8UOImyYf9IAdm7Dw-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FE7281EE61 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 10:05:31 +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 17C425D9C0 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Nov 2021 10:05:30 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 11:05:29 +0100
From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
To: ntp@ietf.org
Message-ID: <YaSl6dVISGbBCMgc@localhost>
References: <20211123131501.Horde.ErUH7VWw3Nr2PFkAGzGIEuI@mail.drown.org> <20211124223810.Horde.KKjrsykVQUMJgW4WVO5ZZmt@mail.drown.org> <YZ9ZADfVlh6z9I4N@localhost> <20211125211838.Horde.B6KZzBvmcXd79vBLQemYwkA@mail.drown.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20211125211838.Horde.B6KZzBvmcXd79vBLQemYwkA@mail.drown.org>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14
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/N2I-_fE9v9B81fzjNSar1bcbiAA>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] comments on draft-mlichvar-ntp-ntpv5-03 / Message Format
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: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 10:05:42 -0000

On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 09:18:38PM -0600, Dan Drown wrote:
> Oh, and another thing I've seen people mess up is which sign means which
> clock is faster.  The time formats specify:
> 
> * "it is the TAI-UTC offset"
> * "it is the UT1-UTC offset"
> * "it is the current offset between the leap smeared time and UTC"
> 
> Maybe these need to be reworded to be more explicit and follow the same
> phrasing? Something like
> 
> * "it is TAI minus UTC"
> * "it is UT1 minus UTC"
> * "it is the leap smeared time minus UTC"

I'd like to keep the word "offset" there. Maybe the explanation can be
added in parenthesis like this?

      *  In the UTC (0) and TAI (1) timescales it is the TAI-UTC offset
         (TAI minus UTC) as a signed integer, or 0x8000 if unknown.

      *  In the UT1 timescale (2) it is the UT1-UTC offset (UT1 minus
         UTC) using the time16 type (0x8000 if unknown).

      *  In the leap-smeared UTC, it is the current offset between the
         leap smeared time and UTC (former minus latter) using the
         time16 type (0x8000 if unknown).

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar