Hal Murray <hmur...@megapathdsl.net>:
> We don't care about the timing in most of the code. The only critical
> section is the chunk between grabbing the time and sending the packet. That
> chunk is likely to involve crypto.
>
> We could fix that with another packet. The idea is that you get a time stamp
> from the kernel on the transmit side. Then you have to send another packet
> to get that time stamp to the other end.
>
> Maybe we should add that to the NTPv5 list.
No, I'd much rather put in a GC lockout on the critical region than
complicate the protocol.
That said, I continue to admire your cut right to the heart of the issue.
ntpd spends enough time in I/O waits that I do not think latency spikes
will otherwise induce any problems above measurement noise.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@ntpsec.org
http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
