David Taylor writes: > On 13/01/2014 14:34, David Woolley wrote: > > On 13/01/14 10:22, [email protected] wrote: > > > >> againstthe reference implementation, but how do you prove that > > > the reference implementation is correct? > > > > I thought the reference implementation was correct by definition. > > Ideally, you need a version built purely to the paper specification by > a "clean-room" team, and then see where the differences lie under > testing. I can't see that happening with the effort currently > available, to be honest.
I'd love to see it, and if this is important enough for folks there needs to be a funding stream to support that effort. But I don't really see the value in that, as we have a very liberally open-source licensed version of the code and what other benefit would there be to a separate clean-room implementation? As to the larger question of "is the reference implementation correct", I'll point out that there were on the order of 1,000,000,000,000 hours of NTP operations in the past year alone, and we try to make it easy for folks to report problems or talk to us. H _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
