[Ntp] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Antw: [EXT] NTPv5 Loop Detection without Stratum

[Ulrich Windl <[e-mail]>]

>>> Danny Mayer <[e-mail]> schrieb am 05.09.2022 um 21:56 in
Nachricht <[e-mail]>:

> On 8/31/22 3:25 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 01:51:43PM -0700, Hal Murray wrote:
>> Or maybe even 2 separate RFCs. The idea being that SNTP will be much 
>> easier
>>> to understand and we can target it for a longer lifetime.  In particular, it
>>> wouldn't have to say anything about loop detection.
>> I don't like duplicating text or code. We just need to make sure the
>> document is clear on what parts are not required for client-only
>> implementations.
>>
>> I think SNTP vs NTP is more about algorithms, not the protocol.
>> Without the symmetric mode, NTPv5 will be very easy to implement.
>>
> SNTP is defined in RFC5905 Section 14. You don't need anything more than 
> that.

Amazingly it talks about using SNTP in the server:
"SNTP is intended for primary servers equipped
with a single reference clock, as well as for clients with a single
upstream server and no dependent clients."

It also says: "(...), NTP and SNTP servers and clients are
completely interoperable and can be intermixed in NTP subnets."

In addition Figure 31 says: "x.digest <-- md5 digest" (probably fixed via errata (is MD5 really required?), but I'm using the original here).

I thinnk for NTPv5 we should specify an example SNTP request packet; what is written in section 14 leaves a lot of interpretation unanswered (e.g. are unused fields all set to zero?)

Regards,
Ulrich


> 
> Danny