IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Ntp] NTPv4 client behavior to ntpv3 reply

rémy decrock <rmdck@rmdck.fr> Mon, 29 July 2024 15:12 UTC

Return-Path: <rmdck@rmdck.fr>
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 C317AC15199A for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:12:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.649
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.649 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, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HK_RANDOM_FROM=0.455, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rmdck.fr
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LH7G-Jhl87pr for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:12:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wilbur.contactoffice.com (wilbur.contactoffice.com [212.3.242.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BF5DC151532 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 08:12:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ichabod.co-bxl (ichabod.co-bxl [10.2.0.36]) by wilbur.contactoffice.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB62E7DC6 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jul 2024 17:12:01 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1722265921; s=20220130-ieei; d=rmdck.fr; i=rmdck@rmdck.fr; h=Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Subject:From:To; bh=qa3Ivkw7aoPJaPW55h3lHkf8qDaNDPxqHrcrvJy+2+8=; b=AT8Req/0vbO0vvyaCe2PmZno2zZjmexinbirLMyRSq4MENUQp6xsTc2LvrYlvtXs UHjvokhmfXTA81UU1Dr2rswP7HQ8J1Hy3V80kGaXgBGDqJ5xBFNyOAg7tbznQB7ytab DtivU/swYycW+IlGUcgMSk67/MwcPbvRMEzT4JQ9L6T2PfoebostSlh+UbMuPceLUqY LlyEcxO+M86PQbJs53aJsxhox9ItI3MZQWHWOCXOBYQpkI3cL9wmoUO260FXolY0LC0 WgJTTaExvPXuz832gD/LeMOQR2hnZPgy9SxfZHFaeNfwnFJDJiOw+DNk9vA3epO89ja ydlopbT4vg==
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 17:11:59 +0200
Message-ID: <499016286.658450.1722265918944@ichabod.co-bxl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_658448_315549798.1722265918943"
From: rémy decrock <rmdck@rmdck.fr>
To: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailer: ContactOffice Mail
X-ContactOffice-Account: com:305125439
Message-ID-Hash: OXQ5WYIL2TCT5UCXEK4RKDIXODSUUA77
X-Message-ID-Hash: OXQ5WYIL2TCT5UCXEK4RKDIXODSUUA77
X-MailFrom: rmdck@rmdck.fr
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-ntp.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [Ntp] NTPv4 client behavior to ntpv3 reply
List-Id: Network Time Protocol <ntp.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/_Ss4DTE-DEYJkIfKVG2z-LLQu70>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ntp-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ntp-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ntp-leave@ietf.org>

Hello,

I have a question about the NTP v4-v3 compatiblity.
According to the RFC https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5905/, v3 and v4 are compatible.
By  compatible, I understand that if a client perform an NTPv3 request to a  NTPv4 server, this one is able to answer in an understandable way to the client.
But what if a NTPv4 client receives an NTPv3 reply to his NTPv4 requests?
Thanks.

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status