IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ntp-mode-6-cmds-09.txt

Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com> Wed, 24 June 2020 10:40 UTC

Return-Path: <mlichvar@redhat.com>
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 A28413A0D34 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 03:40:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com
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 NL2TJtUzI-kI for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 03:40:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-2.mimecast.com [207.211.31.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 659203A0CFA for <ntp@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 03:40:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1592995210; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=sT9PucuGRnT9YVzp53DU/HbZhvCKBTEmS7W4WxT0G9s=; b=GrBSKDXXstJx1opyzw9XWplnVDWvxg9BCZABZVRVNVSCgVp8AeTHNSMghwhEeGgvLvYhKY kP3jNGXPf3CF8kfR5O1sctNy2pYR3Z229g1doCOoA8sURGW78iqV/F5nsmnMfOewmpDCwi 6nNpYminM+yn8jlCbmMhjT/RhRn3S3k=
Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-389-KlGXp4JhPUOb5Q4bGlpGSg-1; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 06:40:08 -0400
X-MC-Unique: KlGXp4JhPUOb5Q4bGlpGSg-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DC75108BD18; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 10:40:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (holly.tpb.lab.eng.brq.redhat.com [10.43.134.11]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51CCA2B4B0; Wed, 24 Jun 2020 10:40:06 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 12:40:04 +0200
From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
To: Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org>
Cc: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>, "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20200624104004.GP22085@localhost>
References: <159282479414.12546.4960020164033916211@ietfa.amsl.com> <6941954c-07cb-2067-50b0-4e718dff110a@nwtime.org> <3B598EB4-FCCE-4AD6-B524-7D35A05494F0@akamai.com> <81de92a1-a695-8c86-c359-98c79af3811f@nwtime.org> <0402BACC-4569-41D9-AEE4-0D31E7F0888A@akamai.com> <655945c8-8785-bbba-c564-91946e4b3d4e@nwtime.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <655945c8-8785-bbba-c564-91946e4b3d4e@nwtime.org>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/mXS5-n9mhm4b5-t6VtoIqOXCIsw>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ntp-mode-6-cmds-09.txt
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, 24 Jun 2020 10:40:13 -0000

On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 02:56:15AM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> The NTP Project's release has long been called the reference
> implementation, in many IETF publications and discussions.  It's not an
> implicit cachet, it's an obvious and long-standing fact.

Which RFCs use "reference implementation", beside RFC 5905 and RFC
5906?

> The NTP Project's code base has, to date, been the base from which all
> previous IETF NTP Standards have been based on.

Some were, but not all of them.

As I understand it, RFC 5905 was based on the latest ntp version at
the time of the draft. Newer versions of ntp have diverged slightly in
their behavior from the RFC and they don't support all the NTP RFCs
that have been published after that.

So, I think it would be correct to call a particular ntp version as the
"reference implementation of RFC 5905 (NTPv4)", but that doesn't work
for other versions.

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email