On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Martin Burnicki <[email protected]> wrote: > Brooks Harris wrote: >> On 2016-07-20 01:08 AM, Tom Van Baak wrote: >>> I recall this is a known problem in the Z3801A status reporting, and >>> possibly other GPS receivers of that era as well. It stems indirectly >>> from a change years ago in how far in advance IERS and DoD were able >>> to update the leap second info into the GPS constellation. Nowadays >>> it's common to get 6 months notice; it wasn't always that much. >> >> TF.460-6 says: >> "2.3 The IERS should decide upon and announce the introduction of a >> leap-second, such an announcement to be made at least eight weeks in >> advance." >> >> Is there a statement in some document from BIPM or IERS that states >> their current announcement policy? How, when, and why is it different >> from 460? I mean, more lead time is a good thing, but what, exactly, is >> an implementer to expect and what standard would would they look to >> learn and confirm that? > > Each bulletin C from IERS says: > > "Leap seconds can be introduced in UTC at the end of the months of > December or June, depending on the evolution of UT1-TAI. Bulletin C is > mailed every six months, either to announce a time step in UTC or to > confirm that there will be no time step at the next possible date."
That's not an official standards document. That's IERS telling us how often they will publish their Bulletin C with not a lot of precision. Sometimes it's sent out on July 1, other times later, for example. Warner _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
