Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

["Jay R. Ashworth" <jra () baylink com>]

Are the people involved in that consensus engineering types?

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <lists () packetflux com>
> To: "John Levine" <johnl () iecc com>
> Cc: "nanog list" <nanog () nanog org>
> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 4:51:42 PM
> Subject: Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

> Having at least a part of one foot in the global time and frequency
> community I'd say that it seems that the consensus is building toward
> eliminating leap seconds.
>
> There was a vote planned in 2012 to do so after a straw poll showed that
> most member countries was in favor to do so.   But in a typical committee
> move they elected to study it more before making a decision.
>
> Hopefully there will be some movement next year when they're scheduled to
> discuss it again.    It's unfortunate that the first negative leap second
> is likely to occur before then.
>
> On Thu, Aug 4, 2022, 11:32 AM John Levine <johnl () iecc com> wrote:
>
> > > > > General press loses its *mind*:
> >
> > No more than usual.  They're just rewriting this Facebook blog post:
> >
> >
> > https://engineering.fb.com/2022/07/25/production-engineering/its-time-to-leave-the-leap-second-in-the-past/
> >
> > It appears that Forrest Christian (List Account) <lists () packetflux com>
> > said:
> > > Personally I'd like to see the UTC timescale be fixed to the TAI timescale
> > > with a fixed offset determined by whatever the offset is when they make
> > the
> > > change.
> >
> > That's what Facebook, Google, and AWS want, too.  Who knows, for once they
> > might be right.

-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink                       jra () baylink com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates       http://www.bcp38.info          2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA      BCP38: Ask For It By Name!           +1 727 647 1274