On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 7:49 AM Eric S. Raymond <e...@thyrsus.com> wrote:
> James Browning via devel <devel@ntpsec.org>: > > I would like to propose a new SHM implementation > > The trouble with any new SHM proposal is that the underlayer is not > POSIX and we theefore can't count on it continuing to exist. > > We need that kind of funcrionality, but any new design should be dome > over an IPC layer that's POSIX/SuSv2. I do not have access to a copy of POSIX and the SuSv2 seems to have SHM support. Changing it to use say a UNIX socket would allow for simpler packet design. Up to six bits for the version another two for leap second status and then an octet for precision. Then the body which could be a pair of timestamps. Then possibly refclock and hostname overriding text fields.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
