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

Heiko Gerstung <heiko.gerstung@meinberg.de> Wed, 28 August 2019 10:08 UTC

Return-Path: <heiko.gerstung@meinberg.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 16C1212007C for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 03:08:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.289
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.289 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=meinberg.de
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 Ul41E2-QVcMp for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 03:08:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server1a.meinberg.de (server1a.meinberg.de [176.9.44.212]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F036120096 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 03:08:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from srv-kerioconnect.py.meinberg.de (unknown [193.158.22.2]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by server1a.meinberg.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0BB1671C072F; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:07:56 +0200 (CEST)
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 server1a.meinberg.de 0BB1671C072F
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=meinberg.de; s=mail201101; t=1566986878; bh=eh4bQn0k6CJGrf+nPrRCyMX22wKvuOJdeidKmCBan94=; h=Date:Subject:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To:Mime-version:From: To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=oHn+FbRG1ol0QJ0RdXtl/S75oj5+X3NHA9mRS1qLYGxdImOtwRzrclE+eZZcJY9YQ Syj3Lv4jAMq+GPvHxvGFv1oIhxZZ5XNlqUJpwT58qh6VL51aP3WbO8PQcmQBWv2K/j s2/n8EpvECsu4+2OoTbjkXP2tZNUsHouloQ+bpWI=
X-Kerio-Anti-Spam: Build: [Engines: 2.15.9.1266, Stamp: 3], Multi: [Enabled, t: (0.000007,0.011066)], BW: [Enabled, t: (0.000007)], RTDA: [Enabled, t: (0.033499), Hit: No, Details: v2.7.53; Id: 15.1i61l68.1djbr4bar.dlo3l], total: 0(700)
X-Footer: bWVpbmJlcmcuZGU=
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.1c.0.190812
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 12:07:53 +0200
Message-ID: <8F6BAF5F-CC7B-47B9-90FD-BD20D6ABE845@meinberg.de>
Thread-Topic: [Ntp] Antw: Re: Calls for Adoption -- NTP Extension Field drafts -- Four separate drafts
References: <1B4A56E7-16A6-4767-9268-BCF4BEB9A247@isoc.org> <BCA949D7-7D92-43A9-9766-573559A9FC70@meinberg.de> <5D66392D020000A100033273@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <5D66392D020000A100033273@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>
Mime-version: 1.0
Importance: Normal
X-Priority: 3
Thread-Index: AZ2x3tU+MDNjYzVhNjFjMDY4OWQ0MA==
From: Heiko Gerstung <heiko.gerstung@meinberg.de>
To: Ulrich Windl <ulrich.windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>, "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>, "odonoghue@isoc.org" <odonoghue@isoc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.100.3 at server1a
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/lZzLFA265TLaV6fnw0addrY88_4>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] 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: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 10:08:04 -0000

Hi Ulrich,

no objections if implementations want to realize the REFID solution earlier, I just would want to avoid running this through the WG to become an RFC when we all could start working on v5 and cover this in that new RFC. Might be more efficient. But that's just my opinion. 

Regarding backwards compatibility of NTPv5: I think it would be no problem to change the NTP packet format if there are requirements we want to meet that can be fulfilled more efficiently with a changed packet header. Any implementation that ignores the version field deserves whatever happens to it and, since a client mode packet contains the version number, an NTP server would most probably have to reply to a v4 client request with a v4 server response anyway. Only if an implementation sends a request with version=5 and then tries to decode the response based on a v4 packet format there will be a problem. And again, implementations doing this should go down in flames anyway IMHO. 

Regards,
   Heiko


-- 
Heiko Gerstung 
Managing Director

MEINBERG® Funkuhren GmbH & Co. KG
Lange Wand 9
D-31812 Bad Pyrmont, Germany
Phone:    +49 (0)5281 9309-404
Fax:        +49 (0)5281 9309-9404

Amtsgericht Hannover 17HRA 100322
Geschäftsführer/Management: Günter Meinberg, Werner Meinberg, Andre Hartmann, Heiko Gerstung

Email:
 heiko.gerstung@meinberg.de 
Web:
 Deutsch   https://www.meinberg.de
 English    https://www.meinbergglobal.com

Do not miss our Time Synchronization Blog:
 https://blog.meinbergglobal.com 

Connect via LinkedIn: 
https://www.linkedin.com/in/heikogerstung
 
 

On 28.08.19, 10:21 "ntp im Auftrag von Ulrich Windl" <ntp-bounces@ietf.org im Auftrag von Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:

    >>> Heiko Gerstung <heiko.gerstung@meinberg.de> schrieb am 28.08.2019 um 08:54
    in
    Nachricht <BCA949D7-7D92-43A9-9766-573559A9FC70@meinberg.de>de>:
    > Hi,
    > 
    > I do not support adopting all four drafts, I believe that we should either 
    > integrate them into a new revision of NTP ("NTPv5") or fix them 
    > problems/issues they address in that new "NTPv5" RFC. Most of the issues 
    > addressed by those drafts can be easily solved by changing/expanding the NTP
    
    > packet format for "NTPv5". 
    > 
    > The "REFID" draft would be obsolete if an NTPv5 packet header for a server 
    > mode packet by definition includes  a "MY_ID" field. 
    
    Hi!
    
    Still I guess with a REFID as extension field could provide a solution
    "sooner" as NTPv5, and it could be available in selected NTPv4 servers in the
    near future.
    
    > 
    > The "MAC/last extension field" draft would be obsolete if we define that 
    > NTPv5 does only support Extension Fields as allowed additional data and a
    MAC 
    > in v5 is always transported inside an extension field (the "MAC-EF" approach
    
    > as described in the draft, for example). 
    
    Just a random thought: Would it make sense for NTPv5 to create a completely
    new packet format, or should NTPv5 be based on extension fields? Some old
    clients could still try to interpret a new format with old rules (inoring the
    version number). With extension fields the old clients could use NTPv5
    "somewhat" (ignoring all true v5 additions), while with a new format those
    clients will have a problem.
    
    Regards,
    Ulrich
    
    > 
    > The "I-DO extension field" draft would be something I would integrate into a
    
    > "NTPv5" RFC as a mandatory requirement for NTP servers. 
    > 
    > The "Extended Information Extension Field" draft would be obsolete if we 
    > introduce either additional packet header fields in v5 or just defined a new
    
    > EF for information that we think should be available from the server. That
    EF 
    > could be sent or not, based on whether the client wants it or not (indicated
    
    > by an EF sent by that client in its request, for example). 
    > 
    > Best Regards,
    >    Heiko
    > 
    > 
    > -- 
    > Heiko Gerstung 
    > Managing Director
    > 
    > MEINBERG® Funkuhren GmbH & Co. KG
    > Lange Wand 9
    > D-31812 Bad Pyrmont, Germany
    > Phone:    +49 (0)5281 9309-404
    > Fax:        +49 (0)5281 9309-9404
    > 
    > Amtsgericht Hannover 17HRA 100322
    > Geschäftsführer/Management: Günter Meinberg, Werner Meinberg, Andre 
    > Hartmann, Heiko Gerstung
    > 
    > Email:
    >  heiko.gerstung@meinberg.de 
    > Web:
    >  Deutsch   https://www.meinberg.de 
    >  English    https://www.meinbergglobal.com 
    > 
    > Do not miss our Time Synchronization Blog:
    >  https://blog.meinbergglobal.com 
    > 
    > Connect via LinkedIn: 
    > https://www.linkedin.com/in/heikogerstung 
    >  
    >  
    > 
    > On 28.08.19, 05:38 "ntp im Auftrag von Karen O'Donoghue" 
    > <ntp-bounces@ietf.org im Auftrag von odonoghue@isoc.org> wrote:
    > 
    >     Folks,
    >     
    >     The following four drafts are four different proposals for new extension
    
    > fields. Please review each draft and indicate whether these should be
    adopted 
    > by the working group. I am sending them all as one set because they are all
    
    > extension fields, but we need a response for each draft listed below. 
    >     
    >     Thanks!
    >     Karen and Dieter
    >     
    >     1.  Network Time Protocol Extended Information Extension Field
    >     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-stenn-ntp-extended-information/ 
    >     
    >     2.  Network Time Protocol I-Do Extension Field
    >     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-stenn-ntp-i-do/ 
    >     
    >     3.  Network Time Protocol MAC/Last Extension Fields
    >     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-stenn-ntp-mac-last-ef/ 
    >     
    >     4.  Network Time Protocol Suggested REFID Extension Field
    >     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-stenn-ntp-suggest-refid/ 
    >     
    >     _______________________________________________
    >     ntp mailing list
    >     ntp@ietf.org 
    >     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp 
    >     
    > 
    > 
    > _______________________________________________
    > ntp mailing list
    > ntp@ietf.org 
    > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp 
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    ntp mailing list
    ntp@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp