nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cost effective time servers
From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <lists () packetflux com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 20:33:03 -0600
I would submit that the proper use of a GPS receiver is for alignment of the start of the second to a more precise value than can be distributed across an asymmetric network like the Internet. The actual 'time label' for that second doesn't necessarily need to come from GPS at all. For security reasons, it's probably a good thing to make sure you validate the data received from GPS in any case. On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 8:23 PM Chris Adams <cma () cmadams net> wrote:
Once upon a time, Jay Hennigan <jay () west net> said:The data from GPS includes the offset value from UTC for leap-second correction. This should be easily included in your time calculation.Not only that, but at least some GPS receivers/protocols notify of pending leap seconds, so software can properly distribute the notification in advance. -- Chris Adams <cma () cmadams net>
-- - Forrest
Current thread:
- Re: Cost effective time servers, (continued)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Jay Hennigan (Jun 21)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Niels Bakker (Jun 21)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Denys Fedoryshchenko (Jun 21)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Tony Finch (Jun 21)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Tom Beecher (Jun 21)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Niels Bakker (Jun 21)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Andy Ringsmuth (Jun 21)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Quan Zhou (Jun 24)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Joe Abley (Jun 24)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Jay Hennigan (Jun 24)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Chris Adams (Jun 24)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Forrest Christian (List Account) (Jun 24)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Chris Adams (Jun 24)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Forrest Christian (List Account) (Jun 24)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Jay Hennigan (Jun 21)
- Re: Cost effective time servers Eric S. Raymond (Jun 24)