IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] Antw: Re: Antw: [EXT] Re: CLOCK_TAI (was NTPv5: big picture)

Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> Mon, 11 January 2021 07:22 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 EE9213A167D for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 23:22:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.037
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.037 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=1.951, PDS_RDNS_DYNAMIC_FP=0.001, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 S0DcTglFLXDF for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 23:22:08 -0800 (PST)
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 E26EB3A167C for <ntp@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 23:22:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0856840605C; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 23:22:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3
To: Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
cc: "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>, hmurray@megapathdsl.net
From: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
In-Reply-To: Message from "Ulrich Windl" <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> of "Mon, 11 Jan 2021 07:56:01 +0100." <5FFBF681020000A10003E15D@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2021 23:22:08 -0800
Message-Id: <20210111072208.0856840605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/hxZ9ibfNaXZbJ9X630voJ0sSTlc>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Antw: Re: Antw: [EXT] Re: CLOCK_TAI (was 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: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 07:22:10 -0000

Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de said:
> With the same logic as claiming UNSYNC during theleap event for non-smearing
> servers, smearing servers should return UNSYNC until the time is "correct"
> again IMHO. 

No.  The whole point of smearing servers is to lie to clients.


if you are using smearing servers you have to be careful to not use any 
non-smearing servers.

If you are using real/correct (non-smearing) servers, you have to make sure 
you don't use any smearing servers.


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email