IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] Quick review of WGLC for status change for draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries

Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org> Sat, 13 August 2022 22:16 UTC

Return-Path: <stenn@nwtime.org>
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 70D46C15C518 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Aug 2022 15:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OOy5oVSJwdxu for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Aug 2022 15:16:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from chessie.everett.org (chessie.everett.org [66.220.13.234]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6CFFC15C515 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Aug 2022 15:16:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.208.75.149] (071-084-168-128.res.spectrum.com [71.84.168.128]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4M4vz71TCCzMP25; Sat, 13 Aug 2022 22:16:51 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <3673e170-f5f1-3e7e-274d-da249e0f4616@nwtime.org>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 15:16:49 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.12.0
Content-Language: en-US
From: Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
Cc: "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>
References: <PH0PR06MB7061FA7A5B338D262B3A2963C2999@PH0PR06MB7061.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <6a187a2f-9883-2fb5-1f51-1593591ddebb@nwtime.org> <PH0PR06MB706126984E4442EF32F8242AC2999@PH0PR06MB7061.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <da155c84-2c70-2e3b-59eb-03e380806cf2@nwtime.org> <PH0PR06MB70611F2331D8255F7E2B6604C2999@PH0PR06MB7061.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <0b4c7efa-3977-b588-0974-33b6a9437e52@nwtime.org> <YvDWC27qKnODlD52@localhost> <0b57b7db-772e-f5e6-e6a0-a433673f3d77@nwtime.org> <YvED7T5R0UsRWbv3@localhost> <b64c6a0a-ea2e-0a19-4bb9-38bfaa2e5032@nwtime.org> <656D355F-E06A-4005-B9D6-90885FA8509D@akamai.com> <1a4bae28-f0f3-e675-899a-bad597b4ee29@nwtime.org> <F74A7B5B-3D77-42AF-BD7E-1A874CCD2D66@akamai.com> <67545c9a-3291-bbe6-c876-4c762c80c710@nwtime.org> <B0A738B6-37A7-420A-97ED-EA6E9D995FE3@akamai.com> <66ae4a6a-841e-4f8e-c7b6-1a6809da7163@nwtime.org>
In-Reply-To: <66ae4a6a-841e-4f8e-c7b6-1a6809da7163@nwtime.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/s58yX_pQEgAVC1U2u494r7ZCi_w>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Quick review of WGLC for status change for draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Time Protocol <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: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 22:16:58 -0000

Rich,

On 8/12/2022 2:54 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> On 8/12/2022 7:44 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:
>>>     I believe I have asked about the costs and benefits of each approach
>>      before, and I have never seen you or anybody else respond to that 
>> request.
>>
>> I believe this is not a question that can be answered. I can only, yet 
>> again, point out that I have seen multiple experiments in TLS and DNS 
>> and they worked fine.
> 
> The question cannot be answered at all?
> 
> NTP doesn't test-deploy and then evolve (go into production) in the way 
> TLS and DNS test-deploy and evolve.
> 
> Have you actually written code that does NTP client/server and peer-mode 
> testing of EFs where one side has no information about what the other 
> side understands?

I have not seen an answer from you to this question.

> I have...
> 
>>>  ...

-- 
Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org>
http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member!

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email