Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption
Steve Guendert <Steve.Guendert@ibm.com> Tue, 01 June 2021 20:34 UTC
Return-Path: <Steve.Guendert@ibm.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 961AC3A2679 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 13:34:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, TVD_FW_GRAPHIC_NAME_MID=0.095, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.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 LsHzj624CfHd for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 13:34:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7C9A3A2678 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 13:34:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0098394.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 151KYAkK062998 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 16:34:10 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=in-reply-to : subject : to : message-id : from : date : content-type : references : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=g087TEBIgoJHdAuZhLR3CZVmqiMLRmYU6TTsFurPZGI=; b=sk7y2zOiXya5Rkl+++Ip0fvrABsIgMPiQAwe1l/RoMy7lvz18Ot1aa0rl/BDKrv+4oK1 mTecHenuTWhgaIpAI62kgTuw9yWx4pRPmDLAzKy2P0rM+7lYjEf6hrl4q7fDn8Fn5chU RMWgP03//MPPjOpXebSgjsE4F3uOf9uvi4ALqRJH+Kap87JT7qUNwzEyczu5NTFxrhWD mMU7lbZF4avSOy9pMNaXeLZG9e2x+ylcxgCDhWeu0nF58Iq5SThFpNkR42XGPCjBuCxy iFYtNbPV82c2F6kp9wiE3W60ypIVacXEnfDnPfhRcC6fEB4XVxTuFfyAJv/k9qctw+Zm iQ==
Received: from ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com (fd.55.37a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.55.85.253]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 38wty1sntu-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 16:34:00 -0400
Received: from pps.filterd (ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 151KWNBA024348 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 20:33:59 GMT
Received: from b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.29]) by ppma01wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 38ud892bhm-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 20:33:59 +0000
Received: from b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.109]) by b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 151KXxmC25952722 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 20:33:59 GMT
Received: from b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50692112061 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 20:33:59 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03A52112065 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 20:33:59 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mww0071.wdc07m.mail.ibm.com (unknown [9.208.69.234]) by b01ledav004.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 20:33:58 +0000 (GMT)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3706.1622570606.6256.ntp@ietf.org>
To: ntp@ietf.org
Message-ID: <OFEB806F52.236EFE69-ON852586E7.0069170B-852586E7.0070F0AF@ibm.com>
From: Steve Guendert <Steve.Guendert@ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2021 16:33:36 -0400
Content-type: multipart/related; Boundary="0__=0ABB0C74DFFA919B8f9e8a93df938690918c0ABB0C74DFFA919B"
References: <mailman.3706.1622570606.6256.ntp@ietf.org>
X-KeepSent: EB806F52:236EFE69-852586E7:0069170B; name=$KeepSent; type=4
X-Mailer: IBM Notes Release 10.0.1FP5 April 28, 2020
X-Disclaimed: 2791
X-MIMETrack: CD-MIME by Router on MWW0071/01/M/IBM at 06/01/2021 20:33:58, CD-MIME complete at 06/01/2021 20:33:58,Itemize by Router on MWW0071/01/M/IBM at 06/01/2021 20:33:58
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: CWOIbS924GxVTUPsrlgDxktVwZLuc2s4
X-Proofpoint-GUID: CWOIbS924GxVTUPsrlgDxktVwZLuc2s4
X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 14 URL's were un-rewritten
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-06-01_10:2021-06-01, 2021-06-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104190000 definitions=main-2106010137
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/wMRU-7MRgFHT-PzRh9iplOn-6D0>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption
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: Tue, 01 Jun 2021 20:34:17 -0000
Hello, I am the IBM Z (IBM mainframe servers) time synchronization architect and engineering lead. I have been following the thread with great interest because our mainframe customers are quite interested in the subject. 95 of the 100 largest banks in the world run their mission critical applications on IBM mainframes leading many to say the world's economy runs on IBM mainframes. They are the largest data center environments in the world. Time synchronization accuracy, resiliency, and security are top of mind for their CIOs and CTOs. I am usually quiet on these threads. However, since you are debating something that is of critical urgency to my customers, on their behalf I am "chiming in". Many of you whom also work for "vendors" have these very same customers as your own customers for your products. These IBM mainframe customers are/will be implementing unicast PTP for their mainframe environments. What to do for time synch security (PTP and NTP) is the big question. While the core business applications run on mainframes, these same customers have extensive open systems environments as well, much of which could be running NTP. I talked with the largest American multinational bank about this topic early last week , and earlier in May with our 40 largest mainframe customers across all industries and geographies. The proposal off NTS4UPTP and its ideas is very important to our customers because they see 1) PTP as a vital part of their future, 2) the idea provides a PTP security solution and 3) as I said earlier, they will still use NTP for some things and the proposal would essentially allow them to use a common security mechanism for both NTP and PTP. A solution that secures only NTP and leaves out PTP is not acceptable to them. It would leave the mainframe time synch environment unprotected. Now, you may be thinking, well those mainframe environments will just go back to/stay with NTP. Guess again. What will happen is we will be forced to develop something on our own for PTP that meets their needs. Standards based is much preferable to proprietary, but you do what the customer demands. Too many times, standards bodies seem to focus on "politics" or protecting things/ideas we may have worked on in the past or personalities. Most of you don't know me and I don't know you. I'm just here as someone with intimate first hand knowledge of what a lot of big end users of time synchronization want to tell you that there are a lot of very large end user companies who would benefit greatly from adopting the proposal under discussion. Therefore, on behalf of IBM's mainframe customers I would like to ask for support of the adoption of NTS4UPTP Rev 3 Regards, Steve Steve Guendert, Ph.D. Time Synchronization / STP Team Leader IBM Z Engineering and Development Member IBM Academy of Technology Leadership Team/TC Steve.Guendert@ibm.com (845) 433-3664 Twitter: Steve Guendert Linked In: Steve Guendert My IBM Research Homepage "When it comes your time to die, be not like those whose hearts are filled with the fear of death, so that when their time comes they weep and pray for a little more time to live their lives over again in a different way. Sing your death song and die like a hero going home." -Chief Tecumseh 1768-1813 From: ntp-request@ietf.org To: ntp@ietf.org Date: 06/01/2021 02:03 PM Subject: [EXTERNAL] ntp Digest, Vol 47, Issue 6 Sent by: "ntp" <ntp-bounces@ietf.org> Send ntp mailing list submissions to ntp@ietf.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ntp-request@ietf.org You can reach the person managing the list at ntp-owner@ietf.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ntp digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption (Danny Mayer) 2. Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption (Daniel Franke) 3. Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption (Daniel Franke) 4. Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption (Danny Mayer) 5. Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption (Daniel Franke) ----- Message from Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net> on Tue, 1 Jun 2021 13:24:24 -0400 ----- To: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>, Heiko Gerstung <heiko.gerstung=40meinberg.de@dmarc.ietf.org> cc: "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption On 6/1/21 11:42 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > I'm not sure I follow here. You can send NTP requests at any rate you > like. That doesn't require a new protocol. The poll field is a signed > 8-bit integer if you had a server that actually looked in the content > of the field. I hope not. How would you implement a negative poll interval? :) It really should be unsigned. If not, then that's really an error. Danny ----- Message from Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com> on Tue, 1 Jun 2021 13:28:57 -0400 ----- To: Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net> cc: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>, Heiko Gerstung <heiko.gerstung=40meinberg.de@dmarc.ietf.org>, NTP WG <ntp@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption It's in units of log2(seconds) so a negative value makes fine sense. E.g. -1 means half a second. On Tue, Jun 1, 2021, 13:24 Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net> wrote: On 6/1/21 11:42 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > I'm not sure I follow here. You can send NTP requests at any rate you > like. That doesn't require a new protocol. The poll field is a signed > 8-bit integer if you had a server that actually looked in the content > of the field. I hope not. How would you implement a negative poll interval? :) It really should be unsigned. If not, then that's really an error. Danny _______________________________________________ ntp mailing list ntp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp ----- Message from Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com> on Tue, 1 Jun 2021 13:37:21 -0400 ----- To: Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net> cc: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>, Heiko Gerstung <heiko.gerstung=40meinberg.de@dmarc.ietf.org>, NTP WG <ntp@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption Anyway, I believe I explained early last April how a negative polling interval might be implemented :-P On Tue, Jun 1, 2021, 13:28 Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com> wrote: It's in units of log2(seconds) so a negative value makes fine sense. E.g. -1 means half a second. On Tue, Jun 1, 2021, 13:24 Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net> wrote: On 6/1/21 11:42 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > I'm not sure I follow here. You can send NTP requests at any rate you > like. That doesn't require a new protocol. The poll field is a signed > 8-bit integer if you had a server that actually looked in the content > of the field. I hope not. How would you implement a negative poll interval? :) It really should be unsigned. If not, then that's really an error. Danny _______________________________________________ ntp mailing list ntp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp ----- Message from Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net> on Tue, 1 Jun 2021 13:54:24 -0400 ----- To: Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com> cc: Heiko Gerstung <heiko.gerstung=40meinberg.de@dmarc.ietf.org>, Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>, NTP WG <ntp@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption Noone should be using a polling interval that small. Oversampling is as bad as undersampling. Danny On 6/1/21 1:28 PM, Daniel Franke wrote: It's in units of log2(seconds) so a negative value makes fine sense. E.g. -1 means half a second. On Tue, Jun 1, 2021, 13:24 Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net> wrote: On 6/1/21 11:42 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > I'm not sure I follow here. You can send NTP requests at any rate you > like. That doesn't require a new protocol. The poll field is a signed > 8-bit integer if you had a server that actually looked in the content > of the field. I hope not. How would you implement a negative poll interval? :) It really should be unsigned. If not, then that's really an error. Danny _______________________________________________ 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 ----- Message from Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com> on Tue, 1 Jun 2021 14:03:06 -0400 ----- To: Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net> cc: Heiko Gerstung <heiko.gerstung=40meinberg.de@dmarc.ietf.org>, Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>, NTP WG <ntp@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption Depends on your clock discipline algorithm. Yes, if you feed an excessive number of samples into a underdamped PLL then your clock is just going to bounce around a lot without ever getting more accurate. But e.g. a Kalman filter should happily slurp up as many samples as you throw at it. Having more information can't be bad unless you use it badly. On Tue, Jun 1, 2021, 13:54 Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net> wrote: Noone should be using a polling interval that small. Oversampling is as bad as undersampling. Danny On 6/1/21 1:28 PM, Daniel Franke wrote: It's in units of log2(seconds) so a negative value makes fine sense. E.g. -1 means half a second. On Tue, Jun 1, 2021, 13:24 Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net> wrote: On 6/1/21 11:42 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > I'm not sure I follow here. You can send NTP requests at any rate you > like. That doesn't require a new protocol. The poll field is a signed > 8-bit integer if you had a server that actually looked in the content > of the field. I hope not. How would you implement a negative poll interval? :) It really should be unsigned. If not, then that's really an error. Danny _______________________________________________ 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
- [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG ado… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Daniel Franke
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Daniel Franke
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Daniel Franke
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Daniel Franke
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Kai Heine
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Daniel Franke
- [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal reque… kristof.teichel
- Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal r… Daniel Franke
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal r… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Danny Mayer
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Daniel Franke
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Daniel Franke
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Danny Mayer
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Daniel Franke
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Danny Mayer
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Daniel Franke
- [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal reque… kristof.teichel
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Steve Guendert
- [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal reque… kristof.teichel
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Daniel Franke
- Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal r… Daniel Franke
- [Ntp] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 -… kristof.teichel
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Langer, Martin
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Doug Arnold
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Doug Arnold
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Doug Arnold
- [Ntp] Antw: [EXT] Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal re… Ulrich Windl
- Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal r… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal r… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal r… Salz, Rich
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Doug Arnold
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Greg.Dowd
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal reque… kristof.teichel
- Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal r… Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Doug Arnold
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG… Miroslav Lichvar
- Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev … Heiko Gerstung
- Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Re: Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev … kristof.teichel