I spoke on time hacking and ntp 3 years ago at shmoocon. On Jan 25, 2015 12:28 PM, "Ken Chase" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think devices would likely be fine, unless they're concerned with > reconciling > a leap-second updated ntp source and one that's not. Who wins? > > For most NTPs I would guess they're slaves to whatever feed and just > 'believe' > whatever they're told. (Sounds like a security hole waiting for high > frequency > trader types, q.v. > > http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/3/4798542/whats-faster-than-a-light-speed-trade-inside-the-sketchy-world-of > ) > > Can't we just subscribe to a leapsmeary NTP feed if we care to have no > big leap (I dont mind)? Isnt NIST offering this? > > /kc > > > On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 06:01:40PM +0100, Karsten Elfenbein said: > >Hi, > > > >Java had some issues with 100% CPU usage when NTP was running during > >the additional second in 2012. > > > http://blog.wpkg.org/2012/07/01/java-leap-second-bug-30-june-1-july-2012-fix/ > > > >Google did something different to get the extra second in: > > > http://googleblog.blogspot.de/2011/09/time-technology-and-leaping-seconds.html > > > >Most devices probably don't even know about the leap second coming as > >that would require a firmware upgrade. > > > > > >Karsten > > > >2015-01-25 16:19 GMT+01:00 Mike. <[email protected]>: > >> On 1/25/2015 at 9:37 AM Jay Ashworth wrote: > >> > >> |This June 30th, 235959UTC will be followed immediately by 235960UTC. > >> | > >> |What will /your/ devices do? > >> ============= > >> > >> > >> I've always wondered why this is such a big issue, and why it's done > >> as it is. > >> > >> In UNIX, for instance, time is measured as the number of seconds > >> since the UNIX epoch. imo, the counting of the number of seconds > >> should not be "adjusted", unless there's a time warp of some sort. > >> The leap second adjustment should be in the display of the time, > >> i.e., similar to how time zones are handled. > >> > >> > >> fwiw > >> > >> > >> > > -- > Ken Chase - [email protected] Toronto >
