RE: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...

[Daniel Marks via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

This is why we've internally standardized on Leap smearing, an added benefit is that it keeps us in sync with Google 
and AWS who also smear time in the same way.

Daniel Marks
d () nielmarks com


------- Original Message -------
On Wednesday, August 3rd, 2022 at 11:33 AM, Matthew Huff <mhuff () ox com> wrote:


> True,
>
> But it's hard enough to get developers to understand the need to code for 61 seconds in a minute, and now they would 
> need to code for 59 seconds as well.
>
> If time systems simply skewed the time so that 60 seconds actually just took 61 seconds or 59 seconds, there would be 
> other issues, but coders wouldn't be involved.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NANOG nanog-bounces+mhuff=ox.com () nanog org On Behalf Of Stephane Bortzmeyer
>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:19 AM
> To: Jay Ashworth jra () baylink com
>
> Cc: nanog () nanog org
> Subject: Re: IERS ponders reverse leapsecond...
>
> On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 11:09:25AM -0400, Jay Ashworth jra () baylink com wrote a message of 32 lines which said:
>
> > General press loses its mind:
>
>
> Indeed, they seem not to know what they write about. "atomic time – the universal way time is measured on Earth – may 
> have to change" They don't even know the difference between TAI and UTC.