>> Only if they correctly ignore extensions that they don't expect. > What would "not ignoring" look like?
If length != 48: Goto Reject > That could be. If it is, we're in the "must design NTPv5" future. But I > don't think we'll know whether we're there unless we field a more > conservative design and get a lot of bug reports. Even if you had a wonderful NTPv5 implementation, you still have to support the old stuff for a long long time. >From a pool server: current version: 430490 older version: 69954 I think that waiting for bug reports won't be good enough. We'll have to actively track down the sources of packets we don't want to support. > My head says that could easily become a deployment nightmare and we should > establish the impossibility of doing an effective job with extensions first. > My head is winning, so far. Good. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
