Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Greg Hennessy writes: Will you support a proposal that keeps leap-second (or -minutes), but mandates that they be determined 40 or 50 years in advance ? Determined to what accuracy? Whatever the prediction is able to nail it to. I realize that this means that the

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rob Seaman writes: On Aug 11, 2005, at 12:46 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: As I understood the situation last week, nobody in the gang here had problems with leap seconds if we got a longer warning (40-50 years). So what prevents us from writing up our own

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Calabretta writes: However, the question that naturally arises is the required timescale of the extrapolation. A figure of 50 years seems first to have been suggested by Poul-Henning Kamp (Aug/04, My personal opinion is that 50 years seems right, 20 years might

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Clive D.W. Feather
Poul-Henning Kamp said: As I said, 50 years seems right, and it does so because there is no currently running computer that has worked for 50 years. Actually, the programme machines that control the signalling of much of the London Underground are somewhat older than that. They run to, IIRC, a

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Clive D.W. Feather writes: Poul-Henning Kamp said: As I said, 50 years seems right, and it does so because there is no currently running computer that has worked for 50 years. Actually, the programme machines that control the signalling of much of the London

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Greg Hennessy writes: On Fri, 2005-08-12 at 08:44 +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Greg Hennessy writes: Will you support a proposal that keeps leap-second (or -minutes), but mandates that they be determined 40 or 50 years in advance

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Ed Davies
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Greg Hennessy writes: On Fri, 2005-08-12 at 08:44 +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Greg Hennessy writes: Will you support a proposal that keeps leap-second (or -minutes), but mandates that they be

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Rob Seaman
On Aug 12, 2005, at 12:10 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: If it gets put officially on their table by an ITU-R member state, their rules does not allow them to ignore it. I suspect the reality is rather different. The real game rarely focuses on the rules. Worst case it will take a few

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Greg Hennessy writes: Here is a concrete proposal: A. Until 2009-12-15 we use the current rules, after that date we use the rules in section B (below) I'd say we need have the new system in place and debugged before changing the rules. Yes,

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Rob Seaman
On Aug 12, 2005, at 10:36 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: I have tried to reach out to you, tried to offer various models which might work for both you and me, but all I get back is they'll just ignore us, we can't do it, we don't know if this will work etc etc. I wouldn't have invested my own

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
Poul-Henning Will you work actively to get such a proposal in front of WP7A and work to get it adopted instead of the current proposal ? No. [...] OK, case closed as far as Rob Seaman goes. Is Anybody else more inclined than Rob to attemt to get a compromise prorposal wedged in instead of

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Greg Hennessy
Is Anybody else more inclined than Rob to attemt to get a compromise prorposal wedged in instead of the current proposal ? I'm not sure it is possible to do so. There has been an announcement of a leap second on 31 Dec 2005, and a sugguestion of no more leap seconds after that. I suspect we

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Greg Hennessy writes: Is Anybody else more inclined than Rob to attemt to get a compromise prorposal wedged in instead of the current proposal ? I'm not sure it is possible to do so. There has been an announcement of a leap second on 31 Dec 2005, and a sugguestion