IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ntp-packet-timestamps-08.txt

Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com> Wed, 26 February 2020 07:41 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 78E8A3A0FD9 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 23:41:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 4M0w-taEpVjj for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 23:41:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B5143A0FD2 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 23:41:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1582702876; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XR3L+TeUke9O4NQuYsMbwqOXgYElOuneT4ELB1vIY4c=; b=Xk6S80Yi9QTud9F4k9HHD71ycqizttmVcqYAjXxXMlRwBuEPfqtAM4wvwhKl5hF+A+duz5 pgCVO1z4hCluobyoErMUmz35vGJcr9Q+mp3LvjFQjI2RqXee9f+9Yqz1ndBMLKefTWNBg2 WWQcnomT98Dv2wuIzEkjUxgWn/PhXxA=
Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-12-uN9QVskwNj2na5baDgnKdg-1; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 02:41:09 -0500
X-MC-Unique: uN9QVskwNj2na5baDgnKdg-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6DD3800D54 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 07:41:08 +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 3C7C69296C for <ntp@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 07:41:08 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 08:41:06 +0100
From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
To: ntp@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20200226074106.GD6766@localhost>
References: <158255158510.5456.15093087067648315543@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <158255158510.5456.15093087067648315543@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/UnyknhcgUrlhFodKgfMjdnvAKIo>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ntp-packet-timestamps-08.txt
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, 26 Feb 2020 07:41:18 -0000

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 05:39:45AM -0800, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-packet-timestamps/

One thing I'd like to be considered is error accounting. In some
applications exchanging a timestamp alone is not enough. It may also
be important to estimate the error in the timestamp. An example is
NTP, which has the root dispersion and delay. Some recommendations for
representing this data might be helpful.

Would that make sense?

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email