In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg Hennessy writes: >> Here is a concrete proposal: >> >> A. >> Until 2009-12-15 we use the current rules, after >> that date we use the rules in section B (below) > >I'd say we need have the new system in place and debugged before >changing the rules.
Yes, you have the time from now until 2009-12-14 to do that. >> 5. Timeservices and GNSS systems should broadcast DUT1. > >In standards the word "should" often means something is optional, >if manditory the word "must" is used. Nobody is in a position to mandate the format or contents of time signal transmissions [1]. Writing anything but "should" in the standard would just be political hot air. If the time services adopt DUT1 transmissions, they will have all sorts of backwards compatibility issues to think about and deal with. Some of them, (like DCF77) have spare bits, some doesn't. >Any proposal with a "should" means >astronomers lose the current restriction that UT1-UTC <= 0.9 seconds >with no guarentee they can obtain delta T. It is already available over the InterNet in several places, including as far as I know BIPM and IERS. If everything else fails, get an Iridium mobile phone and dial your ISP back home, then go to BIPMs FTP server. Poul-Henning [1] In fact, I'm not even sure anybody implements the current TF460 at all. MSF/Rugby is the only VLF station I know off with DUT1 bits but I don't belive they're 100% in line with the standard. DCF77 doesn't have any DUT1 information at all. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
