On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 02:48:16PM -0400, Melinda Shore wrote:
> Hi, all:
>
> Thanks for an excellent meeting yesterday. There are a few
> questions coming out of it that we'll be bringing to the mailing
> list next week, once most people are home.
>
> The draft minutes have been posted at
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/minutes-102-trans-00.
> Please send comments, corrections, etc. to the mailing list.
% 4) Fotis Loukos requested that we clarify what we mean by
% "current NTP time." There is no proposed text. Given
% how late this is in the process, if someone doesn't give
% us text there's nothing to talk about, so if someone
% feels strongly about this they should contribute text.
% Nobody expressed concern. Fotis should produce text, or
% we'll drop it.
("NTP Time" appears twice in the document.)
It seems like the concern here is that NTP is a protocol for conveying time
information from one location/system to another, but there is not
necessarily a single universal/global consensus "NTP Time". That is, I can
run a clock over here with free-running quartz and use NTP to synchronize a
different machine with it, but it will be quite disjoint from "reality".
So it seems like we need to indicate what pool(s) of servers are
authoritative for the time that we want to be using, or just say it's UTC
or GPS or whatever.
% Trans threat analysis
% ---------------------
%
% There hasn't been much progress and we don't want to keep
% the working group open for just this document. There
% doesn't seem to be much interest among working group
% participants. Rich Salz thinks we should flip a coin to
% settle the difference - he thinks the document has value.
% Paul and Melinda will discuss it after the meeting and take
% it back out to the mailing list.
Is there an outcome of the discussion to report yet?
Thanks,
Ben
_______________________________________________
Trans mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
