Re: [Ntp] NTPv5 draft

[Miroslav Lichvar <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 04:51:21PM +0100, James wrote:
> Given so many existing deployments end up running for many, many years the
> next version of NTP will also be around for a long time. Extensions and
> bolt-ons alone will not suffice in assuring the protocol's longevity, and
> that there is clearly a lot of work that must be done with the core of the
> protocol to address ossification, agility, as well as security. I would
> rather see NTPv5 solve these issues and take longer in its design than just
> deal with the "quick fixes", and I'm prepared to invest a significant
> portion of my own time and energy to support the efforts.

How do you know that extensions will not suffice? Maybe it's clear to
you and others, but not to me. Can you please explain in more detail
why the core protocol needs to be changed?

To me, NTP is a protocol for exchanging timestamps and some related
metadata over network. Compared to most other protocols it's extremely
simple. The data can be authenticated or not. For NTP, it doesn't
matter how it is authenticated. Either the mechanism requires prior
knowledge of time, or it does not. NTP cannot help you to circumvent
that requirement.

What do you want NTP to do?

The issues we have on the wiki are long known, understood and have
proposed fixes. They are causing issues in existing applications. If
there is not much bikeshedding, we can have a complete NTPv5 draft in
couple months. Implementations can follow and people are happy.

Now, suddenly people talk about some non-specific issues that have an
unknown solution. Where were you when NTS was designed? And why does
it need to be solved in NTPv5?

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar