Rob Seaman wrote:
|On Jan 22, 2015, at 3:27 PM, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
|> One of them is that the count of months start 2014 not 1972, which
|> extends the representable range of years until 2099.
|
|Prior leap seconds don’t vanish - nor do prior Bulletins C. \
| There certainly may be ret
On Jan 23, 2015, at 5:33 AM, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> Rob Seaman wrote:
>> It is much cleaner and more robust to support the entire history of leap
>> seconds.
>
> Ok i'll bite: why this? This service would only track future changes with
> the first adjustment happening at 2015-06-30.
You
Steffen Nurpmeso said:
> |> Well. PHK follows the IERS format which uses the 1st of the month
> |> after the leap second, i.e., the second after the leap occurred.
> |
> |This is an implementation detail. PHK???s choice is as good as the other.
>
> And i disagree with that. The ISO C(99) st
In message <20150123123330.llbzydw5%sdao...@yandex.com>, Steffen Nurpmeso write
s:
> |Bulletin C is issued whether or not a leap second occasion \
> |(currently June and December, but could be any month) corresponds \
> |to an actual leap second. The encoding (as in PHK’s example) \
> |s
Clive D. W. Feather wrote, with respect to conversion between JDN and
Gregorian calendar date,
> >So in order to calculate the
>> actual date where the drift adjustment occurs you have to face a very
> >elaborate conversion.
>No, you need to use a library that's already been written to do the jo
Hi Poul-Henning,
Getting off topic a bit, the comment in leap.py says:
# I chose 0xcf after an exhaustive search for best performance
# on 28 bit messages.
However, crc8() is being called on the entire first three bytes so 24-bits on
encoding and 32-bits on decoding. I’m not fi
In message <1edf02ff-9589-4413-8c09-710b179be...@noao.edu>, Rob Seaman writes:
>
>Getting off topic a bit, the comment in leap.py says:
>
># I chose 0xcf after an exhaustive search for best performance
># on 28 bit messages.
>
>However, crc8() is being called on the entire
> On Jan 23, 2015, at 1:05 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> The CRC protects against the common risks (lying DNS resolvers), we
> don't need more than that.
The CRC shows that you have internally consistent data. It really only
catches DNS servers that tell lies for the purpose of redirecting t
In message , Warner Losh write
s:
>The CRC shows that you have internally consistent data. It really only
>catches DNS servers that tell lies for the purpose of redirecting traffic.
>It wouldn’t catch a crafty DNS server that was telling a coherent lie
>for nefarious purposes.
Uhm, that
RR?
> On Jan 23, 2015, at 2:43 PM, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
>
> Rob Seaman wrote:
> |On Jan 23, 2015, at 5:33 AM, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
>
> |> This is logical. I indeed have *no* idea on what can happen, \
> |> which is one of the reasons that i am on this list, because \
> |> so many speci
"Clive D.W. Feather" wrote:
|Steffen Nurpmeso said:
|>|> Well. PHK follows the IERS format which uses the 1st of the month
|>|> after the leap second, i.e., the second after the leap occurred.
|>|
|>|This is an implementation detail. PHK???s choice is as good as the other.
|>
|> And i di
> On Jan 23, 2015, at 1:19 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
>
> In message , Warner Losh
> write
> s:
>
>> The CRC shows that you have internally consistent data. It really only
>> catches DNS servers that tell lies for the purpose of redirecting traffic.
>> It wouldn’t catch a crafty D
In message <20150123213328.wxzt__5o%sdao...@yandex.com>, Steffen Nurpmeso write
s:
>Ok, if the RR is meant as a regular distribution service for the
>IERS information then that would make absolutely sense to me.
The idea was to make sure programs could get hold of the most
recent bulleti
"G Ashton" wrote:
|to test inputs to be sure they are in the domain of the function. I have
|found that many
|published algorithms fail to state the earliest and latest date for which
|they work. Finding out
|will require much more than 10 seconds.
The function that has been stolen via third
In message <8c319112-d7fe-4b9d-8400-ea4920fdc...@bsdimp.com>, Warner Losh write
s:
>> Uhm, that crafty DNS server would surely be able to come up with a new
>> non-eyebrow-raising CRC8 value as well...
>
>That's my point. If someone wanted to lie to you about the number of
>leap seconds,
"Poul-Henning Kamp" wrote:
|
|In message <20150123123330.llbzydw5%sdao...@yandex.com>, Steffen \
|Nurpmeso write
|s:
|>|Bulletin C is issued whether or not a leap second occasion \
|>|(currently June and December, but could be any month) corresponds \
|>|to an actual leap second. T
Rob Seaman wrote:
|On Jan 23, 2015, at 5:33 AM, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
|> This is logical. I indeed have *no* idea on what can happen, \
|> which is one of the reasons that i am on this list, because \
|> so many specialists from many different specialist fields \
|> can (or could) show u
On 2015-01-23 10:33 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote:
Steffen Nurpmeso said:
|> Well. PHK follows the IERS format which uses the 1st of the month
|> after the leap second, i.e., the second after the leap occurred.
|
|This is an implementation detail. PHK???s choice is as good as the other.
As with you and Warner, just making sure we’re on the same page.
> On Jan 23, 2015, at 2:05 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> There is a separate identity test on the first four bits, so in
> relation to the CRC they just modify the initial state.
Yes
> The actual message, including CRC is ther
In message <3953bc42-6880-40dc-b14b-745e33c95...@noao.edu>, Rob Seaman writes:
>> With CRC the actual message does not matter, only which and how many
>> bit positions where flipped, [...]
>
>The actual message can matter if the data are correlated in some
>fashion, [...]
Nope. Only if
OK, how about next.leapsec.com. is a CNAME record that points at
c49.leapsec.com. and c49.leapsec.com. has the encoded IP address as
you all have already defined to convey the content of Bulletin C
number 49.
Then when Bulletin C number 50 comes out in July we can leave
c49.leapsec.com as it is
Brooks Harris said:
>> No, you need to use a library that's already been written to do the job.
>> Takes 10 seconds or so.
>
> What "library that's already been written to do the job" are you
> referring to, specifically?
I don't know, not having investigated. But if it's that big a deal, I'm
sur
22 matches
Mail list logo
