IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] An NTPv5 design sketch

James <james.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 16 April 2020 17:06 UTC

Return-Path: <james.ietf@gmail.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 762DC3A03EE for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:06:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=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 (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 fHEMd28XO3Ni for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:06:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x343.google.com (mail-wm1-x343.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::343]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A15573A03ED for <ntp@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:06:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x343.google.com with SMTP id x25so5418207wmc.0 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:06:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8aObmfRsADgcWww+l44LqBvLnCDjWrpKKQIWuICMxC0=; b=E4RV61zDL1HN8shWbuA+BZe3DAUkF5aaNmszukUzTh3RFFMP8YPyDf7i6L0MJsovdZ DARH7/FEUfIqe4Uatta7HvqGOlYfWIFHsKoBwm0jTQMyiOOgbLWuC62/FwtnBCQgKfVz qui/XUO6N4Z/SKxVZtOirjiht5F0UB+lXmOCWA5R4byarNXGC7zM5KSypOowEO4ZwLrZ ixpnxkM8dFFA0EK7cnClrB/GiEPlyrVy2X5YnGXjnYjRhS9WexhKvS7rRSdMVN7/NbIR wPbfFzgj4cxWRChDLiIiGEep3mtQoVmrq2YbqTDLbD0pfa39/XdlW0AQQP9zxzCie4Qm NDPQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=8aObmfRsADgcWww+l44LqBvLnCDjWrpKKQIWuICMxC0=; b=pKrrbC/ga/RNSHQi/WFZFeeboPld9iBDxuE8hPMO3qRBqaeVltIKewDZ/k1c//5GXV OOh6DpHkk/q9TX3rp77/7KhaETb636FzMu9TeMC8A94UWlYBTjVKtsonXIxYI3S3KIhm Ydo4mYUqv6tv+IpN1p8UjacyzTnMhhVKZmBm/RXCkxcfpsHLpnuFQncvDxp5AwqqfchJ siokK8ApYLGLNtYlwZtMOcT7dWUFAIq/s2MsOHi8dYY8ZBxZ7F+mvU53CMmOosIrt1oX Gh/X7JIV+KdOgI6uHGMWe3fh47RjqtijVWGWYVdzjoLxLLhOZej5X5rDteJi5rckqpuk o7hw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Pua8EidnvOjwMjX1YaMBExeDTY3G25ZHLg7v5ueJy2SUFC8KMDyA yNZY5ETw+vEBQDhvp/P+hn5Td07y
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLDXZ/tZ5vtBSsB6UAtQB1+BvX2L+mkNxvsXp0O447wrZS4BZ6kr1I4qZJ1iCPXj+zEDBIMzQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cdfa:: with SMTP id p26mr5859743wmj.186.1587056777804; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2a02:c7f:60b:e000:fda5:713d:1ea2:7007? ([2a02:c7f:60b:e000:fda5:713d:1ea2:7007]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i16sm10541027wrm.8.2020.04.16.10.06.17 for <ntp@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
To: ntp@ietf.org
References: <CAJm83bBV+Pox3r6KU49ShwMOvr=R+U_vDKJtSZhfT6XX4qWmbA@mail.gmail.com> <20200414112541.GD1945@localhost> <CAJm83bCxuS_X68-pvpOWCPSmjAjTeYNJVuuOEhV-i82R7B28Mg@mail.gmail.com> <20200414155241.GF1945@localhost> <CAJm83bC1EhwQQ=+B7XPbEkvhOWvxU8zjCd290Fj5N43aMJQTkg@mail.gmail.com> <20200415072023.GG1945@localhost> <CAJm83bAEDuLk6vSa82D3smXO4x7iDywoy+FpC=gdm=m3SLrVLg@mail.gmail.com> <20200416082557.GI1945@localhost> <DB8PR02MB5611418689CEA2FB66C0FD80CFD80@DB8PR02MB5611.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com> <20200416163654.GK1945@localhost>
From: James <james.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <bf37786d-06f7-3151-0765-f45c65d32d78@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 18:06:16 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:76.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/76.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200416163654.GK1945@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/PuIxC3i9td-2W_Lh2uYVgLeH6Ts>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] An NTPv5 design sketch
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: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 17:06:23 -0000

It appears to me that this Working Group's efforts in determining what 
is appropriate for NTPv5 would be helped by analysing where use cases 
like below are mapped to current/expected protocol functionality and 
capabilities across PTP, NTP, and Roughtime. I would be happy to be part 
of or potentially lead such a thing if people felt it was worth the effort.

- J

On 16/04/2020 17:36, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 04:11:21PM +0000, Doug Arnold wrote:
>> Supporting simple harware implementations in closed specialized networks, like a robot, is a problem already well solved by PTP.  Making NTP do that does not help solve technical problems.  Making a timing protocol that is robust and secure is not at all solved by PTP.  That is how NTPv5 can make the world better.
> ...
> Maybe the best example of an extremely simple device that needs to
> support NTPv5 and nothing else is an NTPv5 stratum-1 server. Consider
> how much will the cost of the hardware change if NTS is required
> and the same performance is expected.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email