IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Ntp] Antw: [EXT] Re: Quick review of WGLC for status change for draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries

Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> Tue, 16 August 2022 09:10 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 B2AF5C14F727 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Aug 2022 02:10:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 JBdSaUs-ECWg for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Aug 2022 02:10:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.uni-regensburg.de (mx4.uni-regensburg.de [IPv6:2001:638:a05:137:165:0:4:4e7a]) (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 2CBE2C15A724 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Aug 2022 02:09:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id DFB71600004E for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Aug 2022 11:09:50 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by mx4.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE2D16000048 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Aug 2022 11:09:49 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 16 Aug 2022 11:09:50 +0200
Message-Id: <62FB5EDB020000A10004C5CD@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 18.4.1
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 11:09:47 +0200
From: Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
To: "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>, Heiko Gerstung <heiko.gerstung@meinberg.de>, stenn@nwtime.org
References: <PH0PR06MB7061FA7A5B338D262B3A2963C2999@PH0PR06MB7061.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <6a187a2f-9883-2fb5-1f51-1593591ddebb@nwtime.org> <PH0PR06MB706126984E4442EF32F8242AC2999@PH0PR06MB7061.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <da155c84-2c70-2e3b-59eb-03e380806cf2@nwtime.org> <PH0PR06MB70611F2331D8255F7E2B6604C2999@PH0PR06MB7061.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <0b4c7efa-3977-b588-0974-33b6a9437e52@nwtime.org> <YvDWC27qKnODlD52@localhost> <0b57b7db-772e-f5e6-e6a0-a433673f3d77@nwtime.org> <YvED7T5R0UsRWbv3@localhost> <b64c6a0a-ea2e-0a19-4bb9-38bfaa2e5032@nwtime.org> <656D355F-E06A-4005-B9D6-90885FA8509D@akamai.com> <1a4bae28-f0f3-e675-899a-bad597b4ee29@nwtime.org> <F74A7B5B-3D77-42AF-BD7E-1A874CCD2D66@akamai.com> <67545c9a-3291-bbe6-c876-4c762c80c710@nwtime.org> <FF22AEFE-ED61-405E-AB40-B7901D0CD588@meinberg.de> <f79cecd6-92b0-595b-e449-6b6f8944ae66@nwtime.org> <133C5633-E4D5-42AF-8215-E3FDE28C5BF9@meinberg.de> <4f833218-231f-8c47-e529-b3ba00f6554e@nwtime.org>
In-Reply-To: <4f833218-231f-8c47-e529-b3ba00f6554e@nwtime.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/h0oqUlRgCdEkHB7ShOU-9ykcYoI>
Subject: [Ntp] Antw: [EXT] Re: Quick review of WGLC for status change for draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Time Protocol <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, 16 Aug 2022 09:10:20 -0000

>>> Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org> schrieb am 15.08.2022 um 23:53 in Nachricht
<4f833218-231f-8c47-e529-b3ba00f6554e@nwtime.org>:
...
> So if we're a V4 server and we get a v5 request, we will respond with a 
> v4 packet that says v5.
> 
> This is consistent with the design.
> 
> No one has seen a v1 packet format in a very long time.  The v1 stuff 
> folks are seeing now are v[234] packets claiming to be v1.
> 
> The format of the base packet saw a slight change going from v2 to v3 
> (sync dispersion was replaced by estimated drift rate), and there was 
> (TTBOMK) no change to the base packet from v3 to v4.
> 
> The change from v2 to v3 caused no problems that I can recall, and even 
> so, I'm unaware of ANY surviving v2 servers out there.

Well, ntpq 4.2.8p15 is using version==2 when doing mode 6 queries, so there are V2 packets!

...

Regards,
Ulrich

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email