On 25-12-09 11:59, G.W. Haywood wrote: > On Thu, 24 Dec 2009, Glenn English wrote: >> On Dec 24, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Ask Bjorn Hansen wrote: >>>> Is there a disclaimer for pool.ntp.org anywhere? >>> No, but if anyone have lawyer resources to help make an explicit one that >>> wouldn't be a bad idea. >> This whole idea is preposterous.
I second that."The Pool" is not a legal organisation based in one country, so which law / language / etc. would apply? > And completely unnecessary. Just put a few notices here and there on > the ntp.org Website mentioning that the entire outfit is stony broke. The main page states: "The pool.ntp.org project is a big virtual cluster of timeservers providing reliable easy to use NTP service for millions of clients". So, it does not mention accuracy of the time. You could remove the word "reliable". Perhaps rephrase it in a way that over the past years the whole service turned out to be quite reliable. There can also be a reference on "how do I use the pool" to use calibrated or otherwise guaranteed time sources instead of "the pool" if you need the time for something specific. There could also be a note that each member of the pool provides time "as is". That the accuracy is often found to be better than within 0.1 s. from GPS time (or whatever timesource the monitor uses), but that not even the year is guaranteed to be correct. DISCLAIMER ;-) I am no lawyer, and in The Netherlands I cannot imagine to be sued for a free service. I trust our judges agree that you should use something calibrated and certified if a measurement (a.o. time) is of any relevance to you. Merry Christmas to all and a Happily synchronised 2010 (+/- 5%)! Arnold _______________________________________________ timekeepers mailing list [email protected] https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
