IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Calls for Adoption -- NTP Extension Field drafts -- Four separate drafts

Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> Tue, 10 September 2019 07:02 UTC

Return-Path: <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
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 CFB98120899 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 00:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.135
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.135 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HDRS_LCASE=0.1, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=1.951, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no 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 MuR5liqwxkNQ for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 00:02:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.1.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1954120866 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 00:02:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F04640605C; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 00:02:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
cc: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>, ntp@ietf.org
From: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 00:02:24 -0700
Message-Id: <20190910070224.5F04640605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/fWXkpxn96juLJnkPmqLiajWZNeo>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Calls for Adoption -- NTP Extension Field drafts -- Four separate drafts
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: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 07:02:29 -0000

watsonbladd@gmail.com said:
> There are quite a few v3 clients that just look at the timestamp and ignore
> the other fields.

If they are v3 clients, their request will have v3 so a sane server will reply 
with v3.


> Are there compelling reasons to change the wire format in v5 and not use
> extensions/NTS?  If so we should do it if not we shouldn't but the wire
> format is secondary. 

I think we should assume the wire format will change and stop wasting time 
discussing whether we need to change it.  The whole point of having a version 
number is so you can change the packet format.


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email