Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote: > > Hopefully there will be some movement next year when they're scheduled to > discuss it again.It's unfortunate that the first negative leap second > is likely to occur before then. Not that soon! There is not likely to be a leap second for 5 years

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

On Wed, 10 Aug 2022, Billy Croan wrote: I think a much better answer to the nuisance of leap seconds (their uncertainty), instead of dropping them all together, MIGHT be let them build up for a century and deal with it every hundred years or every thousand. Maybe every decade? Sheesh. In

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

On Thu, Aug 4, 2022, 15:53 Forrest Christian (List Account) < li...@packetflux.com> wrote: > Having at least a part of one foot in the global time and frequency > community I'd say that it seems that the consensus is building toward > eliminating leap seconds. > > There was a vote planned in 2012

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

tems simply skewed the time so that 60 seconds actually just took 61 seconds or 59 seconds, there would be other issues, but coders wouldn't be involved. -Original Message- From: NANOG On Behalf Of Stephane Bortzmeyer Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:19 AM To: Jay Ashworth Cc: nanog@nanog

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

On 8/3/2022 8:09 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote: General press loses its *mind*: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/earth-spinning-faster-than-usual-shortest-day-ever/#app Have you tested leap second handling,

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 9:22 AM Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > > > Occurs to me that "the last second of today" is approximately a million > times > more likely as a scheduling target than "the next to last second"; they > should > drop 23:59:5*8* instead. You’re probably one of those folks who

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

Tom Scott ponders the leap second. And Timezones, and and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5wpm-gesOY - Original Message - > From: "jra" > To: nanog@nanog.org > Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:09:25 AM > Subject: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond... >

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

Are the people involved in that consensus engineering types? - Original Message - > From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" > To: "John Levine" > Cc: "nanog list" > Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 4:51:42 PM > Subject: Re: IERS ponders re

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

Having at least a part of one foot in the global time and frequency community I'd say that it seems that the consensus is building toward eliminating leap seconds. There was a vote planned in 2012 to do so after a straw poll showed that most member countries was in favor to do so. But in a

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

>> > General press loses its *mind*: No more than usual. They're just rewriting this Facebook blog post: https://engineering.fb.com/2022/07/25/production-engineering/its-time-to-leave-the-leap-second-in-the-past/ It appears that Forrest Christian (List Account) said: >Personally I'd like to

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

Personally I'd like to see the UTC timescale be fixed to the TAI timescale with a fixed offset determined by whatever the offset is when they make the change. Or stated as a different solution with the same result: quit adding/removing seconds from the TAI to UTC offset. At the same time, those

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

- Original Message - > From: "Peter Beckman" > On Wed, 3 Aug 2022, Matthew Huff wrote: > This shouldn't cause huge issues, as most systems will not freak out and > die if the system clocks goes from 23:59:58 to 00:00:00. But things that > were supposed to happen at 23:59:59 on that

RE: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

there would be other issues, but coders wouldn't be > involved. > > > > -Original Message- > From: NANOG nanog-bounces+mhuff=ox@nanog.org On Behalf Of Stephane > Bortzmeyer > > Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:19 AM > To: Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com

RE: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

On Behalf Of Stephane Bortzmeyer Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:19 AM To: Jay Ashworth Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond... On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 11:09:25AM -0400, Jay Ashworth wrote a message of 32 lines which said: General press loses its *mind*: Indeed

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

gt; 61 seconds or 59 seconds, there would be other issues, but coders wouldn't be > involved. > > > > -Original Message- > From: NANOG On Behalf Of Stephane > Bortzmeyer > Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:19 AM > To: Jay Ashworth > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Sub

RE: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

Message- >From: NANOG On Behalf Of Stephane >Bortzmeyer >Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:19 AM >To: Jay Ashworth >Cc: nanog@nanog.org >Subject: Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond... > >On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 11:09:25AM -0400, Jay Ashworth >wrote a mes

RE: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

, but coders wouldn't be involved. -Original Message- From: NANOG On Behalf Of Stephane Bortzmeyer Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:19 AM To: Jay Ashworth Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond... On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 11:09:25AM -0400, Jay Ashworth

Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 11:09:25AM -0400, Jay Ashworth wrote a message of 32 lines which said: > General press loses its *mind*: Indeed, they seem not to know what they write about. "atomic time – the universal way time is measured on Earth – may have to change" They don't even know the

IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

General press loses its *mind*: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/earth-spinning-faster-than-usual-shortest-day-ever/#app Have you tested leap second handling, especially in reverse? How do you simulate it? Are there existing test harnesses for simulating it? Cheers, -- jra -- Sent from my