Gil, I have made suggestions and actuals fixes, on of the Netview products, so I would Think IBM should be open to suggestion as long as it was justified.....
The world is flat ? Sent from my iPad Scott Ford Senior Systems Engineer www.identityforge.com On Mar 1, 2012, at 10:26 AM, Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 05:47:38 -0600, Jan MOEYERSONS wrote: >> >>> Sanely organized networks, even those that do not span multiple time >>> zones, collect and store only UTC [GMT] STCKE values. >>> >>> The table involved is short; it is ordered; it can be searched using >>> very efficient glb-seeking binary search; this table grows very >>> slowly; elements can be added to it before their effective dates; >>> ample advance notice of requirements to add new elements and their >>> effective dates (always one of two) is provided; etc., etc. >> >> All true. And all too bad IBM did not implement such table into their C >> library functions. >> > Sounds like material for a Requirement. And ICANN provides the necessary > data; I've posted the link a couple times in this thread. > > But is there a business justification? Alas, "Most of the rest of the world > does it that way" is unlikely to suffice. > > To IBM's credit, the one time I reported a leap second error in an IBM > product, they swiftly provided a PTF, properly, IMO, switching to use > the TIME macro instead of STCK and ad-hoc conversion. > > -- gil > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
