On 2017-01-04 09:03, Martin Burnicki wrote:
I think this you statement isn't quite fair. If a web server delivered a page with broken HTML code you wouldn't blame the web server daemon, e.g. apache, would you? It's the task of the web server admin to configure the server correctly and make sure the original PHP or HTML code is such that the delivered page isn't broken. IMO this is similar to ntpd. If it's not provided with an updated leap second file then it may have no idea that a leap second is approaching. If a faulty GPS receiver passes a leap second warning to ntpd, should ntpd not trust the GPS receiver since it knows there are some broken receivers out there?
Well, a warning is not even a promise, and promises may be broken. This leads me to the question which has puzzled me for quite some time: Why doesn't the NTP message include the TAI - UTC offset used for the UTC timestamp in the message? Even a faultily configured server knows when it changes this offset, and it could help avoid the interpretation of incorrect warning bits. Michael Deckers. _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
