Magnus Danielson wrote:
On 10/31/2014 02:49 AM, Sanjeev Gupta wrote:
Give it a new name, please. Independent of what the "fundamental
unit" is.
TAI and UTC already exists, but the use of TAI has been actively
discouraged.
Huuh?
Just "recently" PTP/IEEE1588 has been specified to use TAI timestamps by
default, and provide a UTC offset as parameter.
As far as I can see it's easy to derive "legacy" UTC from TAI
unambiguously if you know the current offset, and if you have a leap
second table available this also works for timestamps from the past, at
least after 1970. So what could be the reason *not* to use TAI?
The trouble is that those that wants a TAI-like time-scale
sometimes needs to comply to UTC needs, and for a number of reasons they
have difficulty in using it, so they want to make UTC a TAI-timescale.
The naming of a possible future UTC-like time scale without leap seconds
is a different topic, though, and I fully agree with Harlan's and
Sanjeev's recent postings.
Martin
--
Martin Burnicki
Senior Software Engineer
MEINBERG Funkuhren GmbH & Co. KG
Email: [email protected]
Phone: +49 (0)5281 9309-14
Fax: +49 (0)5281 9309-30
Lange Wand 9, 31812 Bad Pyrmont, Germany
Amtsgericht Hannover 17HRA 100322
Geschäftsführer/Managing Directors: Günter Meinberg, Werner Meinberg,
Andre Hartmann, Heiko Gerstung
Web: http://www.meinberg.de
_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
