Le 14 janv. 2014 à 08:48, Harlan Stenn a écrit : > William Unruh writes: > >> And a standard has no business to specify how a program achieves the >> goals. It certainly has a business to specify what how the packets >> are structured, and perhaps even suggest what standards it should >> achieve in disciplining the clock, but how it does that should be no >> business of the standard. It would be like saying that all editors >> should only use ASCII. > > I disagree with you.
Me too. When Dave wrote RFC 1305 from which NTP v3 emerged, He was careful to exclude the algorithms from the protocol definition. Indeed, in the abstract he says: "This document describes the Network Time Protocol (NTP), specifies its formal structure and summarizes information useful for its implementation. and for example when describing the clock filter algorithm, says "Specification of the clock-filter algorithm is not an integral part of the NTP specification, since there may be other algorithms that work well in practice. However, one found to work well in the Internet environment is described in Section 4 and its use is recommended." The same restraint is used for the other algorithms described. So the algorithms are only provided to aid the implementer, BUT it is a good service that he has done us, as having commonly accepted implementation proceeders gives users confidence in the protocol and provides clock disciplining behavior consistent over a wide range of network topologies and appliances using it. Mike > > H > _______________________________________________ > questions mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
