IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Ntp] Antw: [EXT] Re: NTPv5: big picture

Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> Thu, 07 January 2021 07:33 UTC

Return-Path: <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
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 ACC983A0115 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 23:33:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 jLiIl2mZNIUQ for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 23:33:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4.uni-regensburg.de (mx4.uni-regensburg.de [194.94.157.149]) (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 447CB3A0365 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Jan 2021 23:33:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 0A5AC6000050 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 08:33:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by mx4.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC4936000049 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 08:33:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 08:33:03 +0100
Message-Id: <5FF6B92C020000A10003E016@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 18.3.0
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2021 08:33:00 +0100
From: Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
To: Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com>, jamesb.fe80@gmail.com
Cc: "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>
References: <20210101025440.ECE3340605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net> <CAFTY+dChQ5pX2w9tqz=ORsorfFVNCeeherrBjuRLP77iSLKCag@mail.gmail.com> <CAJm83bDheTXhwS6wEEPVe8hu-zbhy01H+3q7Wx85_3aYBYmt+w@mail.gmail.com> <CAFTY+dDVpPUQ4qX+t+knn2ivDg37LYcyn8vJ7uj6bAeBwfBXXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAJm83bBXujnajEKuAE35xCCTSiZyVtX_NzB_Rwvj26e=9QsWBw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJm83bBXujnajEKuAE35xCCTSiZyVtX_NzB_Rwvj26e=9QsWBw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/WHGHj92stts9t5vwXShgI7adYk8>
Subject: [Ntp] Antw: [EXT] Re: NTPv5: big picture
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, 07 Jan 2021 07:33:10 -0000

>>> Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com> schrieb am 05.01.2021 um 17:30 in
Nachricht
<CAJm83bBXujnajEKuAE35xCCTSiZyVtX_NzB_Rwvj26e=9QsWBw@mail.gmail.com>:
> I'd rather just add more bits to the timestamp so that ±100 years of range
> doesn't have to be a concern.

Or like IPv4 to IPv6 ("think big"): 64 bit for the second and 64 bits for the
fractional part. That should be enough.

> 
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021, 11:25 James Browning <jamesb.fe80@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021, at 8:09 AM Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:00 AM James Browning <jamesb.fe80@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My shortlist is to shift the epoch to 2020, (a)symmetric authentication
>>>> to extensions, and the timescale to TAI based not UTC based.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can we have something less cursed? The engineers of our civil calendar
>>> chose the birth of their savior, and you want to choose *2020*?
>>>
>>
>> (/topic)I picked something with 136 years of future instead of throwing
>> 50, 120, or 2020 years into the past.(topic)
>>
>> Do you have a better year that is _after_ some of us were born?
>> _______________________________________________
>> ntp mailing list
>> ntp@ietf.org 
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp 
>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email