Re: [Ntp] New Version Notification for draft-gont-ntp-port-randomization-02.txt

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

Hello, Dieter,

Thanks for your email!


On 21/7/19 23:58, Dieter Sibold wrote:
> Hi Fernando,
> many thanks for the update of your draft. I have the following comments:
> 
> - Sec 1, third paragraph, first sentence. From my point of view the
> sentence is ambiguous. Do you want to express that BCP 156 is formally
> updating RFC 5905? I thought this is the intension of this draft. Maybe
> this could be formulated more precisely.

No. What I am saying that there is a BCP on this topic, and the NTP spec
goes against it. So our draft is meant to align the NTP spec with the
existing BCP on the topic. Will tweak the text to make it more clear.




> - Sec 3.2, third paragraph, second sentence: I suppose you mean: '...
> that the clock selection and ...' and not '... that the clock select and
> ...'.

Yes. Will fix this.



> - Sec 4. I would appreciate if this section would contain a comparison
> of the specification language between RFC 5905 and the proposed new
> language.  This would make it easier for the reader to see the changes
> you introduce.

Point taken. Will update such that it says "this: [..] is replaced with
this:".



> - Sec 3.2, second paragraph: that the synchronization of the two
> system's clocks may result in a different clock value is a priori not
> very surprising. It is worth mentioning if the two systems are in the
> same network. I suppose this is what you mean. If yes, please clarify.

Yes, that's what we meant. We will address this in the next rev.

Thanks!

Cheers,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492