Re: [LEAPSECS] prep for WRC 23
Michael Deckers via LEAPSECS writes: >> My Tl;dr version of the resolution is: > >> . Please keep DUT1 less than 100 seconds. > k) that the maximum value for the difference between UT1 and UTC > should be no less > than 100 seconds, taking into account the constraints of the > technological systems > expected to be used to disseminate this value, " You're right, I misread that. They /really/ dont want to ever see a leapsecond or leapminute, do they ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] prep for WRC 23
E pur si muove UTC may no longer serve as a kind of solar time (after 2026 or 2035, or somebody said 2040 the other day), but civil time will continue to have engineering requirements tracing to both solar and atomic time scales. Shenanigans will result, bedeviling future blinkered technocrats. Rob Seaman Lunar and Planetary Laboratory University of Arizona On 12/22/23, 12:42 PM, "LEAPSECS" wrote: Resolution 655 was approved by the WRC plenary, reportedly in a very routine manner and with with neither drama nor long speeches. The full text of the resolution is on page 399 of the provisional final acts: https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-r/opb/act/R-ACT-WRC.15-2023-PDF-E.pdf My Tl;dr version of the resolution is: Timescales are not spectrum regulation, we defer to CPGM and BIPM on that, but will handle any fall-out as far as radio signals go. Please keep DUT1 less than 100 seconds. Then BIPM then issued this press release: https://www.bipm.org/en/-/2023-12-12-wrc-dubai Which I read as death notice for the leap-second, with further details of the funeral to announced after CPGM's meeting in 2026. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] prep for WRC 23
On 2023-12-21 18:22, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: My Tl;dr version of the resolution is: . Please keep DUT1 less than 100 seconds. I do not read that from the text. The original [page 399] says: " recognizing . k) that the maximum value for the difference between UT1 and UTC should be no less than 100 seconds, taking into account the constraints of the technological systems expected to be used to disseminate this value, " This seems to say that on the contrary, at least 3 decimal digits will be needed for the integral part of the approximation of |UT1 - UTC| in time signals that include an estimate of UT1 - UTC after 2035. Anyway, I do not think that the CIPM will recommend a maximal value of 100 s for |UT1 - UTC| because there is a slim chance that this will not be enough until 2135. On the other hand, ITU-R might come up with a scheme where the approximation of (UT1 - UTC) is only given modulo 100 s in radio signals, so that 2 digits would suffice for the integral part. Michael Deckers. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
