[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >There's also the theoretical possibility of a negative leapsecond, >but of course that's intentional.
It is not supposed to step backwards then It is supposed to take a second seconds to move forward at a glacial pace. -- ie, if during that time the clock is read, it is supposed to give a later time than the previous reading (by a microsecond or so), but otherwise it is stopped. I guess it is true that if the time is out by more than 125ms is it it does step. _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
