Re: [Ntp] for the Interim

Dieter Sibold <dsibold.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 06 June 2022 10:44 UTC

Return-Path: <dsibold.ietf@gmail.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 4F3ADC14F6EB for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jun 2022 03:44:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.103
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.103 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 YPgSch8nhHbK for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jun 2022 03:44:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x535.google.com (mail-ed1-x535.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::535]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 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 5AEF8C14F612 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Jun 2022 03:44:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x535.google.com with SMTP id fd25so18232951edb.3 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 06 Jun 2022 03:44:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version; bh=cK3V7ksrTD91HVmKl0WIitzsyCKUOie/6wxYQmZFGIQ=; b=HnlGYlQrvMXNGP49PqkfbRW3T19Aqn1N8ujy3evRmGVSzbMw4jKrA85yBmefAafQT9 HsGdoyDtchC0EfbpD3HeSoyA7ogqR1jdi35amebCYK5Scb8prDPxUSO8T4kwXh4SNWkp rwuhnY8lbv3kMPTsHskTl7yLMoe/6bOpUdir/Qy0znHnmMMNYpSZfbpNagwzeAH9lPF2 Tj5yoWSnH76JUNQ82ls+xaOmXBVOl4FdFepl/LkuoxZE8cHC+oTdGeeaiTgz8w6E8qzq 8z7pD64RcOjF5YdD4DhUihZH2vh37l96ecFT66+ClrdD291lC03g2hmoOgLKSZZ56P1b FGdg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version; bh=cK3V7ksrTD91HVmKl0WIitzsyCKUOie/6wxYQmZFGIQ=; b=tvAucbFiUckYjpRUYRG4P6BY7oES+FGVXqBadkIaAJtKHwTRGbk5NKGTBBMgrTSDOP Jzuo4aOMz0w3N9mc8u4LXE9DRZndAEZn2UnKjNO0ARkXZN6KHNmAw7wWz2/od7j8Ac6G 8LdFzyReh1lis1mmpAFw3F/Cah04RSGtT5tpTO1BoRLYVYSpqqNrhP3pq5znABS148LX Hlb/gZiermNmovLeaSGw77nvHyrMCO8996ctafFezb23y4RJVEBbIWjSIIthG2jBJ+Ik E5G7fX+wYKsKurda1KEP6toLo+KKMEzPS5huvLNiZqX1wdKDeG/t43dJBm5uMZh7akCR ny7w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5323HbkOGzp+SeM+OGc8AeqdmlNQGVge/w4E6DQWApLMxwBSHI5m eLeQ5F9S1Kk4wbrU/l3H6in0h2bAqhw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyKxlqB7V1VX8jMZKYjvLtHHl6pWvfEwtbojujUB3VWaX73U2Dw97T+vUFvbyRZnATwGv/59g==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1d4a:b0:42e:93de:17f4 with SMTP id dz10-20020a0564021d4a00b0042e93de17f4mr17936377edb.8.1654512274318; Mon, 06 Jun 2022 03:44:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.101.148] (p200300d17f35cffc1190881791914026.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:d1:7f35:cffc:1190:8817:9191:4026]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h1-20020a170906590100b006fe97996423sm6113085ejq.219.2022.06.06.03.44.33 for <ntp@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 06 Jun 2022 03:44:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dieter Sibold <dsibold.ietf@gmail.com>
To: ntp@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2022 12:44:31 +0200
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.14r5898)
Message-ID: <0233DE49-ECE4-40DA-8427-E874D52CEB8B@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <203D7A93-444A-46B6-B8EA-0B5B52E926F7@akamai.com>
References: <203D7A93-444A-46B6-B8EA-0B5B52E926F7@akamai.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=_MailMate_F405DF98-06B6-4494-A991-E6CFAAC505AD_="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/zi42s9ApNocaeD0s30UcBRrxjS8>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] for the Interim
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: Mon, 06 Jun 2022 10:44:40 -0000

Thanks for the update.

Chair’s hat off.

I consider this draft to be ready to be advanced.

I have only two small hints.

1) Sec. 2.2 states that RFC 5906 defines 30 extensions (15 each for request and response).  From what I see, Sec 13 of RFC 5906 specifies 30 extensions: 10 for request and response messages and 10 for error response messages.

2) Sec. 2.2, first bullet point: From my point of view  the bullet point does not clearly indicate which values are considered as erroneous: the values in the registry or in the implementation?

Dieter




On 3 Jun 2022, at 18:34, Salz, Rich wrote:

> I would like WGLC to be concluded and the document to be advanced.
>
> On 6/3/22, 12:29 PM, "internet-drafts@ietf.org" <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>
>
>     A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>     This draft is a work item of the Network Time Protocols WG of the IETF.
>
>             Title           : Updating the NTP Registries
>             Author          : Rich Salz
>     	Filename        : draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries-04.txt
>     	Pages           : 10
>     	Date            : 2022-04-18
>
>     Abstract:
>        The Network Time Protocol (NTP) and Network Time Security (NTS)
>        documents define a number of assigned number registries, collectively
>        called the NTP registries.  Some registries have wrong values, some
>        registries do not follow current common practice, and some are just
>        right.  For the sake of completeness, this document reviews all NTP
>        and NTS registries.
>
>        This document updates RFC 5905, RFC 5906, RFC 8573, RFC 7822, and RFC
>        7821.
>
>
>     The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries/__;!!GjvTz_vk!UtGh6zdR13iQLADZyK-gAL97jgJkVOqisDAq5H1jCDo8Z8bk2I6wH4vyxBM7LyX_HHJimrXgdHn75PHBZW90Ay4$
>
>     There is also an HTML version available at:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries-04.html__;!!GjvTz_vk!UtGh6zdR13iQLADZyK-gAL97jgJkVOqisDAq5H1jCDo8Z8bk2I6wH4vyxBM7LyX_HHJimrXgdHn75PHB-ZA-e4g$
>
>     A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ntp-update-registries-04__;!!GjvTz_vk!UtGh6zdR13iQLADZyK-gAL97jgJkVOqisDAq5H1jCDo8Z8bk2I6wH4vyxBM7LyX_HHJimrXgdHn75PHBqe_YXTw$
>
>
>     Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     ntp mailing list
>     ntp@ietf.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp__;!!GjvTz_vk!UtGh6zdR13iQLADZyK-gAL97jgJkVOqisDAq5H1jCDo8Z8bk2I6wH4vyxBM7LyX_HHJimrXgdHn75PHB4HN0Jw8$
>
> _______________________________________________
> ntp mailing list
> ntp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp