On 1/29/19 6:11 PM, Gary E. Miller via devel wrote:
> Which conflicts with the Proposed RFC which says the NTS-KE tells us
> which NTPD server, not the config file.
The draft supports a mechanism wherein the client can request an NTP
server from the NTS-KE server.
--
Richard
signature.asc
On 1/29/19 4:38 AM, Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> How should we tell the system we want to use NTS when talking to a server?
>
> The catch is that we potentially need two names/addresses.
>
> I think the simple case is just:
> server ntp.example.com nts
> That will do a NTS-KE exchange with
Also, Python 3.6.7 on FreeBSD
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
devel mailing list
devel@ntpsec.org
http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> Btw, I tried to reproduce this failure with 3.5.6, 3.6.7, and 3.7.1, without
> success. Do you have any tips for reproducing? Input/output redirection?
> Environment variables?
I can get it on NetBSD 8.0 with a simple ./waf configure build
That's over ssh
Python 3.7.0 (default, Sep 26 2018,
Would some CI wizard please add running tests/option-tester.sh
on the most convenient OS/distro. Or maybe once per OS.
-
[64/93] Compiling ntpd/ntp_proto.c
../../ntpd/ntp_proto.c: In function âfast_xmitâ:
../../ntpd/ntp_proto.c:2267:15: error: assignment to expression with
Gary said:
>> https://secure-web.cisco.com/...
> That is NOT the link I sent! Someone's email is messing with links!
> Why would something called "secure-web" be doing non-secure things???
It's not uncommon for malware/spam filters to do things like that. They don't
touch the links
Yo Matthew!
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 03:56:13 +
Matthew Selsky wrote:
THis is weird:
> >
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 07:18:20PM -0800, Gary E. Miller via devel wrote:
> Yo Fred!
>
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 19:01:40 -0800 (PST)
> Fred Wright via devel wrote:
>
> > > Well, the way we use sys.stdout is warned about in the Python doc.
> > > That is enough for me to want it aligned with the
Yo Fred!
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 19:01:40 -0800 (PST)
Fred Wright via devel wrote:
> > Well, the way we use sys.stdout is warned about in the Python doc.
> > That is enough for me to want it aligned with the python doc.
>
> The real question is why the build procedure thinks it needs to
> output
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019, Gary E. Miller via devel wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 17:11:15 -0800
Hal Murray via devel wrote:
Gary said:
Update:
Works: 2.7, 3.7
Fails: 3.5, 3.6
It was working a week or two ago.
Yup.
Did we change anything? (I don't think so.)
Agreed, not in that area. I
Yo Hal!
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 17:11:15 -0800
Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> Gary said:
> > Update:
> > Works: 2.7, 3.7
> > Fails: 3.5, 3.6
>
> It was working a week or two ago.
Yup.
> Did we change anything? (I don't think so.)
Agreed, not in that area. I have been assuming it was a local
Gary said:
> Update:
> Works: 2.7, 3.7
> Fails: 3.5, 3.6
It was working a week or two ago.
Did we change anything? (I don't think so.)
Did something in Python change?
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
devel mailing list
Yo Hal!
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 16:05:41 -0800
Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> Gary said:
> >> How about:
> >>server ntp.example.com nts 1.2.3.4
> >> or
> >>server ntp.example.com nts bob.example.com
>
> > Why do we need ntp.example.com at all? Aren't we supposed to use
> > the NTPD
Gary said:
>> How about:
>>server ntp.example.com nts 1.2.3.4
>> or
>>server ntp.example.com nts bob.example.com
> Why do we need ntp.example.com at all? Aren't we supposed to use the NTPD
> server returned from bob.example.com?
The intent was to do the NTS-KE dance with
Yo Gary!
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 15:44:15 -0800
"Gary E. Miller via devel" wrote:
> Yo All!
>
> > I figured out why some hosts have the below error, but not others.
> >
> > If Python 2.7 is the system Python, it works. If Python 3.5 or 3.6
> > is the system Python I get the below failure.
>
>
Yo All!
> I figured out why some hosts have the below error, but not others.
>
> If Python 2.7 is the system Python, it works. If Python 3.5 or 3.6 is
> the system Python I get the below failure.
Update:
Works: 2.7, 3.7
Fails: 3.5, 3.6
RGDS
GARY
Yo James!
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 15:23:04 -0800
James Browning via devel wrote:
> On 1/29/19, Gary E. Miller via devel wrote:
> > Yo Hal!
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 02:38:26 -0800
> > Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> >
> >> The complicated case is when we want to specify the IP Address.
> >> How
Yo All!
I figured out why some hosts have the below error, but not others.
If Python 2.7 is the system Python, it works. If Python 3.5 or 3.6 is
the system Python I get the below failure.
So the polyglot code is not polyglot enough.
> I'm getting an odd build error on one of my hosts. Ideas?
On 1/29/19, Gary E. Miller via devel wrote:
> Yo Hal!
>
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 02:38:26 -0800
> Hal Murray via devel wrote:
>
>> The complicated case is when we want to specify the IP Address. How
>> about: server ntp.example.com nts 1.2.3.4
>> or
>> server ntp.example.com nts bob.example.com
Yo Hal!
On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 02:38:26 -0800
Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> The complicated case is when we want to specify the IP Address. How
> about: server ntp.example.com nts 1.2.3.4
> or
> server ntp.example.com nts bob.example.com
Why do we need ntp.example.com at all? Aren't we
> I'd suggest using a new keyword for that and leaving the existing ones
> behijnd for NTP w/o encryption.
Then we'll need 2 new keywords. We want NTS to work on pool sites too.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
devel mailing list
e...@thyrsus.com said:
>> Your "empty cookie string as a sentinel" doesn't work unless you allocate
>> space for the extra slot.
> Eh? We know what the maximum number of cookies is. I think all we have to do
> is notice which cookies are empty (have initial NUL). But I might be wrong
> about
Hal Murray via devel writes:
> How should we tell the system we want to use NTS when talking to a server?
>
> The catch is that we potentially need two names/addresses.
I'd suggest using a new keyword for that and leaving the existing ones
behijnd for NTP w/o encryption. In general you need to
> +#define NTS_COOKIELEN128 /* placeholder - see RFC 6 */
Again, that should be MAX, and we need lengths.
Our client talking to another server implementation may get a different length.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
devel
Hal Murray :
>
> Eric said:
> >> They are mostly binary blobs: cookies, keys, nonces, ...
> >> It might be worth packaging blob and length into a struct.
> > OK. That's inside-NTS work - do as you like there. I need to concentrate
> > elsewhere for a bit.
>
> How about packaging the blob of
Hal Murray via devel :
>
> How should we tell the system we want to use NTS when talking to a server?
>
> The catch is that we potentially need two names/addresses.
>
> I think the simple case is just:
> server ntp.example.com nts
> That will do a NTS-KE exchange with the system at
How should we tell the system we want to use NTS when talking to a server?
The catch is that we potentially need two names/addresses.
I think the simple case is just:
server ntp.example.com nts
That will do a NTS-KE exchange with the system at ntp.example.com and use the
IP Address it
Eric said:
>> They are mostly binary blobs: cookies, keys, nonces, ...
>> It might be worth packaging blob and length into a struct.
> OK. That's inside-NTS work - do as you like there. I need to concentrate
> elsewhere for a bit.
How about packaging the blob of bits with a 4 byte header: 2
28 matches
Mail list logo
