David Woolley writes: > Harlan Stenn wrote: > >> Oh, my mistake: I quote RFC5905 below, which is for NTPv4, which is > >> technically in _draft_ status - though it does seem pretty far along and > >> I believe current ntpd adheres to NTPv4, not v3. > > > > The NTP code *defines* the spec, and there will be times when the > > I think you mean the "ntpd reference implementation", e.g. Microsoft's > NTP code does not define the standard.
Yes, thanks... > Also, I don't think this is the correct relationship between RFCs and > reference implementations. An RFC specifies the protocol for a specific > reference implementation. If you do more than fix bugs in the reference > implementation, you need a new RFC before it becomes the standard. Yes, and what you describe is the ordinary case. The reference implementation for NTP is a bit different - any difference between the specification and the reference implementation is grounds for careful scrutiny and deliberation. Sometimes the spec is correct. More often than not, the code is the preferred way to go. There comes a time when ntp-stable is the "current" RFC code and specification, and ntp-dev is what we use to start to drive the "next" version of the RFC. Sometimes there are several releases of the -stable code. The push towards an NTP4 RFC began in late '96, with ntp-4.0 being released in September of '97. The last release in the 4.0 branch was in January of '00. The 4.1 branch (improvements to the V4 spec, etc.) ran from August of '01 thru July of '03. The 4.2 branch has run from October of '03 until now. We're expecting the last release of the 4.2 branch this summer, and after that we'll start on the next branch of the code (which is still expected to drive the NTPv4 specification forward). H _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
