Re: [Ntp] NTS IANA request

[Hal Murray <[e-mail]>]

[e-mail] said:
> My response was intended to be a technical response.

There is no technical content in "total rubbish". 

> I don't have the time or the desire to refute all of the wrong claims in this
> thread. 

I thought Daniel's message looked good.

If it's "total rubbish", it shouldn't take long to point out some of the problems and/or point out the most obvious fatal flaw.

--------

I have a data point to contribute.

>From Daniel's message:
> As a slight tangent, we never concluded the discussion as to what we're going
> to do about the fact that so many ISPs are dropping 123/udp traffic with
> payloads larger than 48 bytes. I think we got as far as concluding: 

I have 2 cloud servers in the pool, one in San Francisco, the other in London.  As part of the NTS hackathon a month or two ago, they were helping to debug NTS.

There were problems getting NTP+NTS packets to the server in London.  I forget the details.  Nobody seemed surprised.  There was at least one "we've seen it before" comment.


Has anybody done a survey?  Is there a non-NTS packet over 48 bytes that most servers will respond to?

-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.