On 12/20/16 9:21 PM, Royce Williams wrote: > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Royce Williams <ro...@techsolvency.com> > wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Yury Shefer <she...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Google announced public NTP service some time ago: >>> https://developers.google.com/time/ >> >> Leap smearing does look interesting as way to sidestep the >> potentially-jarring leap-second problem ... but a note of caution. >> >> I've had multiple time geeks tell me that leap-smearing is pretty >> different from strict-RFC NTP, and Google themselves say on that page: >> >> "We recommend that you don’t configure Google Public NTP together with >> non-leap-smearing NTP servers." >> >> So it looks like we shouldn't mix and match. And since most folks >> should probably want some heterogeneity in their NTP, it may be a >> little premature to jump on the leap-smear bandwagon just yet. >> >> I'm vague on the details, so I could be wrong. > > This is informative: > > https://docs.ntpsec.org/latest/leapsmear.html > >> Does anyone know of any other (non Google) leap-smearing NTP implementations?
The NTP Project has had a leap-smear implementation for a while. We also have a proposal for a REFID that indicates the provided time is a leap-smear time, and Network Time Foundation is working on a new timestamp format and API that will easily allow time exchange between systems using different timescales. -- Harlan Stenn <st...@nwtime.org> http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member!
