Warner Losh <[email protected]> wrote: > (1) NTP is defined by the RFC to be UTC today,
Yes, but which version of UTC? Some NTP server operators may very well choose to continue serving a leaping version of UTC (what I call UTC1972) well past 2017, for a couple of reasons: a) because this "redefined UTC" is no longer a valid form of UT, some may very well regard the redefinition as illegitimate and continue using the old definition; b) the existing RFC said "UTC" when this term unambiguously meant a time scale with leap seconds, hence some may very well choose to interpret the RFC as specified a leaping timescale regardless of what someone else later does to the UTC acronym. And even if someone later writes a new RFC that explicitly specifies a leapless ITU2012 timescale, operators of existing NTP servers built to the old RFC could use the age of their existing equipment as casuistical justification for continuing to serve a leaping continuation of UTC1972 instead of ITU2012. Folks, the leaping version of UTC will NOT stop in 2017 no matter what the ITU may wish. If Monsier Gambis is unwilling to continue sending leap second bulletins from his home PC during non-work hours, I'm sure someone else will, and anyone who is enfused with a passionate love for leap seconds and a burning desire to continue using them will surely continue acting upon LS bulletins (and configuring his/her NTP servers to do so) whether they come from IERS or from somewhere else. > Why should this time be any different than the last time? Leap seconds > were rushed in, at the last minute with little coordination or cooperation > in a manner that left hard feelings for years. The difference is that with the vastly enlarged number of stakeholders, the protests can be a lot louder. The best protests are those done with actions rather than just words, and that means continuing to operate real-life systems according to the old definition, intentionally disregarding the illegitimate redefinition. MS _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
