IETF Logo Mail Archive

[ntpwg] Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization)

"Ulrich Windl" <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> Tue, 28 March 2017 06:24 UTC

Return-Path: <ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 110FF128CDB for <ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:24:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 Akm9rAIOprCC for <ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC313126C89 for <ntp-archives-ahFae6za@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:24:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D414586DB9F for <ntp-archives-ahFae6za@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:23:56 +0000 (UTC)
X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08FB686D77E for <ntpwg@lists.ntp.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:23:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.51]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>) id 1cskXg-0000A6-Hn for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:23:52 +0000
Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 5B4254F0C8 for <ntpwg@lists.ntp.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:23:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5E6A5B1D9 for <ntpwg@lists.ntp.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:23:47 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:23:47 +0200
Message-Id: <58DA0171020000A1000255BB@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:23:45 +0200
From: Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
To: Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com>
References: <CA564C5C-6CED-4810-BA2F-5433F2525249@isoc.org> <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <CAJHGrrTvY0gdPdrWDDJiEbD3hnA6vKWhva4cFzNgt=e6zGY5tA@mail.gmail.com> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <CAMbs7ks+zcZV+d0sRxq=0LD-UbLjOhhpaK=GxvPEX0KJ7rz0=g@mail.gmail.com> <CAJm83bCT5PeSWq6kG8gfOz6Yfw7i8+3ix1yQazNuM9d0-OL3AQ@mail.gmail.com> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> <CAJm83bCvGR4rcRYHKFO57GOy5ZQDYfp0M4fkY7sq=1nsT0Lrfg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJm83bCvGR4rcRYHKFO57GOy5ZQDYfp0M4fkY7sq=1nsT0Lrfg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.51
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org)
Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization)
X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol <ntpwg.lists.ntp.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ntp.org/options/ntpwg>, <mailto:ntpwg-request@lists.ntp.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/ntpwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntpwg@lists.ntp.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntpwg-request@lists.ntp.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg>, <mailto:ntpwg-request@lists.ntp.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org
Sender: ntpwg <ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org>

>>> Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com> schrieb am 27.03.2017 um 22:50 in
Nachricht
<CAJm83bCvGR4rcRYHKFO57GOy5ZQDYfp0M4fkY7sq=1nsT0Lrfg@mail.gmail.com>:
> On 3/27/17, Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org> wrote:
>> It would help if you properly quoted your context.
>>
>> I don't see a '32' anywhere in what Aanchal said, above.
> 
> The context I should have included was from Miroslav upthread:
> 
>     My suggestion is to remove Precision from that list and add before
>     that paragraph: Precision SHALL (or SHOULD?) be set to 32.
> 
>     Anyway, do the all other fields need to be zero? As long as they are
>     constant and not unique to the individual clients, as in most SNTP
>     implementations they currently are, it wouldn't be a problem, right?
> 
>> Assuming this is about the poll interval, I have 2 comments:
>>
>> - Bluntly, OpenNTPD would not be my first choice for a source for NTP
>> protocol experience or knowledge.
> 
> Regardless of your opinion of OpenNTPD design choices, the facts
> remain that it's in wide deployment and sets the precision field to

Do you have numbers for "wide deployment"? I guess Microsoft's implementation of NTP has widest deployment, I I wouldn't take it as a reference ;-)

> zero.  Those facts alone make it a good choice for standardization
> since:
> 
> 1. Matching an existing implementation leads to one less opportunity
> for fingerprinting.
> 2. Existing widespread use of this value means we can be confident it
> won't break anything.
> 
>> - There is likely benefit to knowing the client's poll interval in
>> certain situations so the server can recommend changes to the poll
>> interval.  This becomes more difficult if the server doesn't know what
>> the client's poll interval is.
> 
> You were confused here about which field we were discussing. Zeroing
> the poll interval is already a MAY in the current draft, partly
> because we want to allow for exactly this sort of thing.
> _______________________________________________
> ntpwg mailing list
> ntpwg@lists.ntp.org 
> http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg 




_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email