Dave, In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "David L. Mills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joseph, > > Conversely, if a client syncrhonizes to a server strictly running TAI > and never signals leaps, NTP will deliver TAI. NIST, USNO and I have > discussed this serveral times and concluded the lessor of two evils is > to continue with NTP on UTC. Yep. True enough. But GPS emits TAI (plus an offset), so one can claim that configuring the NTP timeserver to emit GPS System Time (not UTC) is to generate what is essentially TAI. This is widely done in the big-radar world. Joe > Dave > > Joseph Gwinn wrote: > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Woolley) wrote: > > > > > >>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> > >> > >>>compliant. Is there a similar mod for NTP. I am > >>>hoping that there is a mod that will cause NTP to > >>>supply theoretical UTC (even if it is not ascci). > >> > >>Both POSIX and NTP use UTC. Your problem is that you are not using > >>using UTC, but, rather, using TAI. > > > > > > Actually, POSIX does *not* use UTC in the normal sense of the word, as > > no leap seconds are applied. > > > > The fundamental POSIX timescale counts what amount to SI seconds from > > the POSIX Epoch, 0h 0m 0s UTC 1 January 1970. Every day contains > > exactly 86,400 seconds. > > > > That said, if one drives a POSIX box via NTP from a GPS timeserver set > > to emit UTC (versus GPS System Time), time on the POSIX box will be > > pretty close to UTC. > > > > Joe Gwinn _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
