On 12/11/2010 09:23, Paul Sheer wrote:
  I'm surprised by your claim that Telcos don't do NTP, [...]
I'm sure many do.

My point is that, if one's starting premise is that most systems in the
world *require* second-accurate syncronization, this is simply untrue.

In fact most work perfectly well even when they drift by minutes,
and a significant portion of critical systems do drift by minutes
in practice.
In practice, these systems must not be using NFS. NFS gets crankly when the times drift this much. Sure, it kinda works, but there's a number of weird effects.

Also, many of these systems appear to work, where "work" is defined as "not catastrophically fail," but a number of problems present themselves downstream. My mail client sorts things in send time order. This means that people whose system clock is wrong wind up out of order. I'd call that failure, but it kinda works too.

So the magnitude of this "kinda works" degrades as the time synchronization between systems gets worse.

This is orders of magnitude more error than any leap second.
One problem with the "kinda works" attitude is that is a barrier to entry for people whose systems need to work correctly to a much higher precision than "minutes". The kinda works attitude means nobody bothers to correct aberrant behavior because it doesn't crash the system or programs. When someone goes to deploy systems, it becomes clear that these problems represent a "death of a thousand cuts" situation.

That's one reason why you're seeing the push back from people on this list: many have tried to deploy systems where sub-second synchronization was required by the application and have run into many problems...

Warner
-paul





_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs




_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

Reply via email to