Jeff wrote: > Is the leap bit supposed to be cleared by a client if it gets LI=00 > from a server? Or is the bit only *set* based on information from a > server, and cleared only upon application of the leap second? If the > latter is the current implementation, it might well explain the bogus > leap second behavior many of us saw a few days ago. Unless you have a > different explanation/understanding?
I'd have to look all that up, and I know different versions behave differently. This topic is something that's getting a lot of recent discussion and scrutiny... H _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
