This I believe is the most recent public statement on the topic: https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2015/05/Got-a-second-A-leap-second-that-is-Be-ready-for-June-30th.html
One could imagine having a public ntp pool on the interwebs that implemented smearing. (I know this will be heresy to some.) -christopher. 73 de AI6KG On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Peter Vince <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 27 September 2016 at 14:40, Warner Losh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >... > > Eliminating leap seconds would be a great way to unify all these > approaches :) > > And it too is compatible with JTS. > > > Smearing seems like a clever way of papering over the problem of the > leap-second, but as others have said, surely a standard needs to be > defined, and that way everyone can compare and match their time - surely > the whole point? > > I am interested that Google have chosen to linearly smear over 20 hours, > thus increasing each second in that period by 13.8888... microseconds - > surely such an irrational step is difficult to achieve? Could it be that > they actually step 125 microseconds every 9 seconds, or maybe 25 > microseconds every 1.8 seconds? I wonder if Christopher has any inside > knowledge on the details? > > I'm also curious about the change from cosine to linear smear: the linear > smear results in a very sharp step change in frequency, exactly what we > DON'T do, whereas the cosine smear has a very smooth and gentle change, > surely more easily followed. Could it be that this would need some very > small (way sub 100ns) steps at the start and end which would be almost > impossible to achieve accurately? I guess that if we know the time is > changing at a fixed rate, we can easily allow for that when trying to hold > a frequency? Again, does Christopher have any inside info on the thought > processes? > > However, these new problems, and the Azure systems disagreeing between > countries, all comes back to what Warner said - scrapping leap seconds > solves all these problems, at the expense of - with due respect to Rob, > Steve. etc. - the astronomers having to increase the range of DUT1 on their > software. > > Peter > > > _______________________________________________ > LEAPSECS mailing list > [email protected] > https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs > >
_______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
